EIRENICON.
PART II.
LONDON :
GILBEET AND BIVINGTON, PBINTEBS,
ST. JOHN'S SQUAEE, B.C.
FIRST LETTEE
TO THE
YERY REY. J. H. NEWMAN, D.D.
In (Explanation
CHIEFLY IN EEGABD TO
THE REVERENTIAL LOVE DUE TO THE EVEK-BLESSED
THEOTOKOS,
AND
THE DOCTRINE OF HER IMMACULATE CONCEPTION;
WITH AN ANALYSIS OF CARDINAL DE TURRECREMATA'S WORK ON THE
IMMACULATE CONCEPTION.
BY THE REV.
E. B. PUSEY, D.D.
REQIFS PROFESSOR OF HEBREW, AND CANON OF CHRIST CHTJECH.
SOLD BY JAMES PARKER & CO., OXFORD,
AND 377, STRAND, LONDON;
RIVINGTONS, WATERLOO PLACE, LONDON,
11IOU STREET, OXFOED, AND TRINITY STEEET, CAMBEIDGE.
1869.
. *» . '/ A
CONTENTS.
PAGE
Personal explanations . . . ;V "// ^^J •:;».•*••- /i?:Tl» • 3 — 5
Objects of the Eirenicon ........ 6
No imputations intended . 'V '•' . ' ••r-ijJf .»•.&* -r. wlo v ''•. r - . 8
Ground of adducing language as to B. V. . > -' :<-»'»>?' J ' •?• • 10
Citations, mostly from books popular in England . . . .11
Grounds of those citations . i'viv-yrm iv- •• -+ •• » -^ > . 13
Title of co-Redemptress used extensively f. • • i"f o.'1^ ni'% 14 — 15
Language cited, justified by Oakeley . "> < - . : w ;.''.' 16 — 19
De Montfort, Faber 17
Object of gathering into one the devotions as to the B. V. . . 18
Belief as to the title " Theotokos " assumed . _ /JJTI: ««•?«< v'j .3 . 21
The'B. V. a " moral " instrument of the Incarnation . • . " ) . 22
Great titles given by the Fathers to the B. V. related to the fruits
of the Incarnation •', -:: v 1 w ly.J r^/umoo */; .*&'".'••"•. 26—33
Intercession of the Saints a necessary fruit of perfected love . 34 — 35
Meaning of titles given by the Fathers to the B. V. partly
changed; others added ; effects . • vf;: v'- /;--w'J* f. 36 — 40
Points agreed upon, or at issue . if! ?<] rw / ,Mf*ofl I-f* : rri . 41 — 42
Difierence of Eoman Catholics as to Marian devotions . (jwroa . 43
Vision of the woman " clothed with the sun " '>i,;fi 3 » ^4ru . 44
" Behold thy mother " . . . .i-jM-w v<f fotl .*>f . 45
Interpreted of S. John only by the Fathers . ••*,•»/. .'Vvi • - . .48
Improbable texts alleged later . . . . . ; v: V»'; :.- . 49
Active and passive conception . . . . . ;-f# • *>5: : • ;-i . 51
Explanation of Mgr. Dupanloup. Imm. Cone, differs only in
degree from that of Jeremiah and S. John B. . . 52 — 53
Schoolmen deny sanctification before animation . '* v ,r V .(•• 55
Soul of the B. V. could be sanctified, when infused . : . . 56
Active conception taught by some to be Immaculate . . .57
Revelations of S. Brigit . v^c ;«n ,"., • 7rjYjo -j, iol • »>rfc^ . 67 — 68
a
vi Contents.
PAGE
Active conception commonly meant by word " conception . .59
This, its scriptural use 59 — 60
Unexplained, the Immaculate Conception will probably include
that of the body too 60—64
Grounds of Scripture and Tradition against the Immaculate Con-
ception, quoted by Biel 64 — 67
Special weight of St. Augustine's . . . . . .67
His mode of declining to include the B. V. in actual sin implies
his belief of her conception in original sin (see also De Turr.
below, pp. 506, 507) 68—69
Force of his exception of Our Lord Alone from original sin . 70 — 71
Objects in reproducing De Turrecremata's chain of authorities
against the Immaculate Conception . . . . .72
Character of Turrecremata's work . . . . 73 — 74
De Bandelis . 75
Importance of an adequate explanation of this tradition . 76 — 77
Those authorities, of five classes . . . . . .77
Special weight of third class (omitted by Perrone), which held that
Christ alone was not conceived in original sin, because not
born in the way of nature 78
Prae-Augustinian writers quoted (except Tertullian and Origen)
by S. Augustine, on universality of original sin, without
making exception. 1 — 11. S. Irenseus, Tertullian, Origen,
S. Cyprian and African Council of 66 Bishops, Keticius,
Olympius, S. Hilary, S. Ambrose, S. Gregory Naz., S. Basil, •
S. Chrysostom 79—94
12. Pope Zosimus, as. commented on by S. Augustine . . 94 — 97
13. S. Augustine's statement, through 18 years, on " the likeness
of sinful flesh" as peculiar to our Lord. Mary from
Adam died for sin: Jesus Alone Innocent, as born of a
virgin : all flesh, except His, infected through mode of our
conception : all inherit sinful nature from Adam through
mode of their birth. The condition of Mary's birth
, dissolved by re-birth 98—106
Passages of S. Augustine held to be valid by Perrone . 107 — 108
14. Clement of Alexandria .,,.,,.. 108
15. Eusebius of Csesarea . . , . . , , 109
16—17. S. Athanasius, Didynras Alex. . . , , .110
1& Macarius Mg. Ill
19—20. Mark Hermit, S. Greg. Nyss 112
21. De Bapt. in- S. Basil 114
22—23. S, Pacian, S. Paulinus s.^ . . 115
24—25. S. Zeno ; Peter of Tripoli, imitator of S. Aug. ^r: . 116
Contents. vii
PAGE
26 — 27. Pious unknown; Hypognosticon (perhaps M. Mercator) 117
28. Ambrosiaster 118
29 — 30. S. Jerome, " Christ alone without sin ;" Rufinus . . 119
31 — 32. S. Cyril of Alexandria, Cassiau 120
33—34 Eusebius Gallicanus, S. Pet. Chrysologus . . . 122
35— 36. Vincent of Lerins, S. Leo I .123
37. S. Prosper . . ..... . . .125
38—39. Chrysippus of Jerusalem, Antipater Bostr. . . .126
40 — 41. Vincentius, Olympiodorus . . . . . . 127
42. Pope S. Gelasius . . . . . . 128
43. Julianus Pomerius ........ 130
44. S. Fulgentius of Ruspe . 131
45. Peter the Deacon, &c., 14 Bishops with S. Fulgentius . . 132
46. Boethius 135
47. Cassiodorus 137
48. 2nd Council of Orange and S. Csesarius .... 139
49. Fulgentius Ferrandus 140
50. Primasius 141
51. Pope S. Gregory the Great . . . . . . .142
52. S. Isidore of Seville 144
53—54. John IV., Pope Elect; Sophronius 145
55. Bede . . . .147
56. S. John Damascene 148
57. Alcuin, or contemporary . . . . . . . 150
58. Rabanus Maurus . . . . . . . . . 151
59. Haymo of Halberstadt 152
60. Khemigius . .153
61. John Geometra 154
62—63. S. Bruno Herbip., S. Peter Damiani . 155
64. S. Bruno, Founder of the Carthusians ..... 158
65. S. Bruno Astensis . . . . . . . . .162
66. S. Anselm , 163
67—68. John Beleth, Eupertus ....... 167
69. Author in S. Bernard . ... . . . .168
70. S. Bernard ..... f ... 170—176
71. Hugo a S. Victor .'.'.'. 176
72—73. Eadmer (formerly thought S. Anselm), Herve of Dol. 179—181
74. P. Lombard 181—183
75. Porree 183
76. Odo, Bp. of Frisingen . . . . . . . .184
77. Eichard of S.Victor 185—168
78—79. Zacharias of ChrysopoUs, Peter of Celle . . . 189—193
80. Gul. Parvus 193
a 2
viii Contents.
Pi.OE
81—82. Sicardus, Innocent III. . . g*.1Mau£u**j ?;< .T; • 194
83. Cencius Sabellius (Honorius III.) . . .. ; ^$i . 197
84. P. Comestor (see p. 437) . .,. :,;,;. . . . .198
Canonists : —
85. Hugutio, or Hugo 199
86. Job. Teutonicus 202
87. S. Raimund de Penyafort .... V, ",:•;. -203
88. Card. Hostiensis 204
89. Durandus Speculator 205
90—91. Guido de Baiisio, Archidiac. ; Barth. a S. Concordio . 207
92. John Andrese ... . . . . . -208
Other Jurists • • -209
Doctrinal Writers : —
93. William, Chancellor of Paris ib.
94. Alanus (perhaps Magnus) . 210
95. Petrus Prsepositivus . . . . . • • .211
96 — 97. Moneta of Cremona ; Gul. Arvernus, Bp. of Paris . . 212
98. Wm. of Auxerre (Maurice, Bp. of Paris) . . . .213
99. John of Paris (Poinlane) 214
100. Alex, de Hales ib.
Contradictory ways of getting rid of his testimony . . 215
101. Albertus Magnus 216
102. S. Bonaventura 217
Spurious Sermon ascribed to him 220
103. S. Thomas Aquinas 221
Answer to wrong inference from one place .... 224
104. Sermons on Antiph. " Salve, regina " 226
105. Hugo de Argentina 227
106. Hannibaldus de Hannibaldis 229
107. Peter de Tarantasia (Innocent V.) 230
108. Joann. JEgidius of Zamora 232
109. John de Balbis 233
110. Henry of Ghent 234
111. Ulric of Strasburg 236
112. Richard Middleton 238
113. jEgidius of Rome . . . . . . . .239
114—115. Odo Rigaldi ; Hugo Gall., Card. Abp. of Ostia . .241
116. John of Naples . . 242
117. Guido of Perpignan 245
118. Hervseus Natalis . . 247
119. John de Poliaco . . 249
Contents. ix
PAGE
120. John de Bacon, or Baconthorpe 250
121. Joann. Eicardi, Bp. of Dragonara 253
122. Alvarus Pelagius. F. of the Sanctification at Kome . . ib.
123. Paul. Saluc. de Perusio (Add. p. 519) 257
124. Nic. Treveth, of Oxford 258
125. Durandus a S. Porciano ib.
126. Gregory of Ariminum . 260
Writers of Sermons on Fest. ofJB.V. : —
127. Bich. of S. Laurence . . . . . . . . ib.
128. Bp. of Lincoln (probably Grostbead) 262
129—130. Joan, de Eupella, Odo de Castro Kodulphi . . .264
131. Lucas of Padua, disciple of S. Antony of Padua . . . 265
132. Wra. Perault ib.
133. Martimis Polonus 266
134. Conrad of Saxony 268
135. Jac. de Voragine ib.
136. Thomas de Ales .271
137. Jacoponus de Benedictis ib.
138. James of Lausanne 272
139. Card. Bertrand de Turre 273
140. Jordanes de Quedlinborch 274
141. S. Yincent Ferrier 275
Commentators : —
142. John de Varsiaco 277
143. Card. Hugo de S. Caro . . ... . . .278
144. William of Alton 279
145. Nic. de Lyra ib.
146. Ludolf of Saxony ("Life of Christ") . . . . .281
147. Petr. de Palma 282
148. Stephen, ancient Postillator and Paris Doctor . . . 283
149. Venble. Cistercian father, of Fountain Abbey . . . ib.
150. S. Antoninus of Florence .284
Card, de Turrecremata . . . . t . . • • 288
Scotus rests the contrary on abstract arguments, not on tradition . 291
Petau on want of diligence and sagacity in citing evidence in
favour of Imm. Cone 295
Meaning brought into, not out of, authorities alleged . . . 297
1. Acts of S. Andrew's Martyrdom ...... ib.
2. S. Dionysius of Alexandria (if his) ...... 298
3. Latin Pseudo-Origen -299
4. S. Hippolytus, of Conception of Our Lord . . . . 301
x Contents.
PAGE
5. S. Ephraim, the B. V. " guileless " . . . . . . 301
Speaks only of actual holiness "- ';•'* • . . . . . ib.
6. S. Ambrose, freedom from actual sin only .... 306
7. S. Augustine, condition of birth dissolved by grace of re-birth . ib.
8. Theodotus, of actual grace on Incarn. ..... 307
9. Writer in S. Chrysostom (of Incarnation) l. •" . . . 309
10. S. Proclus, the same, and against offence at it V v- . . ib.
11. Sedulius, if words were pressed, would go the other way . 311
12. Post-Augustinian treatise against five heresies . . . 312
13. S. Pet. Chrysologus, B. V. pledged to Christ in the womb . 314
14. S. Sabba, no ground to think we have any thing of his . . ib.
15. Psalter ascribed to S. Columban declares conception of all in
orig. sin 316
16. Hesychius, of actual grace . . . . . . .318
17 — 18. Andrew of Crete, Germanus, relate to the Incarnation or
actual holiness ......... ib.
19. S. John Damascene, her miraculous Cone, or freedom from
actual sin. ......... 322
20. Pseudo-Alcuin and Council of Frankfort, of actual stainlessness 324
21. Theodorus, eminence of the creation of B. V 325
22 — 24. Joseph, hymn- writer ; George of Nicomedia ; Peter Chore-
piscopus. Actual holiness of the B. V., or that derived from
our Lord's Presence 326
25. Some Sophronius, actual graces of B. V. . . . . 327
26. John Geometra, of her Conception of Christ. Held the Cone.
in orig. sin ......... ib.
27. Fulbert of Chartres, knowledge of her temporal beginnings
hidden 329
28. S. Maximus of Turin, whole context relates to grace of
virginity (see also on the other side, p. 431) . . . 331
29. Paschasius Kadbertus argues in proof of immaculate Nativity
of B. V., held sanctif. after cone, in orig. sin, Petau,
De Band., De Turrecr. (see below, p. 493) . . . 332—336
30. (Ballerini) Charta of Ugo not earlier than 13th cent., and
spurious ; " Trope " of same date 337
31. Hymn, later than S. Ambrose, relates to Virgin-birth . . 339
Three Greek writers alleged, Antipater, Sophronius, Isidore of
Thessalonica, go the other way 341
Titles speak only of actual undefiledness ib.
Holiness of parents did not prevent transmission of orig. sin . 345
Presence of the Holy Ghost at her Cone, relates to holiness of
parents, John of Euboea, Peter of Argos, Jacob Mon., Isid,
Thess. . 346—348
Contents. xi
PAGE
Festival of Conception of the B. V. has reference to the temporal
beginning of her who was to bear the Saviour of the world:
Hymns, Sermons ....... 351 — 357
Festival of the Nativity of B. V. has reference to the same . . 358
Greek Icons. Conception of S. John Baptist .... 359
Sketch of introduction of Festival of Cone, of B. V. in the West . 360
Ways in which it might be kept, apart from immaculateness 362 — 364
Introd. in England in view to the Incarnation, Constitution of
Abp. Mepham, 1328 365
At Eome, in view to subsequent sanctif., Alvarus Pelagius . . 367
Carthusian statutes . . . . . . . . . ib.
Old Dominican service-books ....... 370
Office of Vine. Bandellus . . ..... . . .372
Breviary of Church of Gironne 374
Breviary in many parts of Germany ...... 376
De Turr.'s argument from Office on the Nativity .... 377
Festival of Cone, did not imply its immaculateness : Clement VI.
while Card. Abp. of Rouen . . . . . .378
Clement XI 379
Bellarmine, not chief foundation of festival ..... 380
Natalia Alex. . ....... . .381
Scripture alleged : —
Arg. even from faulty reading " Ipsa," Gen. iii., exaggerated . 382
Falls with the reading Ipsa . . ... . . . 385
De Rossi's grounds, why reading should be corrected . . . 386
Perrone's argument as to identity of meaning in either reading
fails . 388
Minute patristic parallel between the B. V. and Eve rather seems
to exclude than include a point not paralleled . . . 389
Objects of the above statement of evidence ..... 392
Value of the " quod ubique " acknowledged on both sides . . 393
Original sin 397
English and Tridentine statements thereon contrasted with
Luther's and Calvin's 398
How original sin is transmitted, a mystery 401
Difficulties, as stated by Mohler 402
Innocent III. on its transmission, before and after he was Pope . 404
His doctrine, possible basis of explanation ..... 407
The " fornes peccati," or concupiscence ..... 409
Exceptions in "Eirenicon" as to popular doctrine on the B. V. only
made to what was not " de fide "..... 410
English feeling as to the B. V., why cramped . . . . 411
xii Contents.
PAGE
LOVE for the B. V. cannot be too great .;'. l :. . . .412
Yearning towards her in the Eng. Church, Bp. Andrewes . . 413
Bp. Hall, Pearson . 414
Bp. Hicks Tru"V'. . . .415
Dr. Frank -{^ V . .417
George Herbert 'r'!f.- -418
"The Christian Year" '..'.419
Hopes '• V;'. ' . 420
Bev. G. Williams on interpolations in the Greek Liturgies . . 425
APPENDIX.
Labour and care of Card, de Turrecremata in preparing his " Re-
lation on the Truth of the Conception of the B. V.," for the
Council of Basle 429
Omitted passages or authorities : —
S. Augustine . . . ib.
151. S. Maximus of Turin . . ... ... .431
Ancient writer quoted as S. Cyril ...... 432
S. Cyril 433
Pope S. Leo I '. . . .434
S. John Damascene ......... 435
S. Bernard 436
On Peter Comestor 437
152. Ancient Doctor of Paris ib.
153. Kichard of Armagh 438
Dominicans : —
154. Peter de Palude (objection removed) ib
155. Thomasinus of Ferrara ....... 440
156. Bernard of Clermont 441
157. Robert de Holcot (opposed interpolation) . . . . ib.
158. Thomas de Walleis 442
159. Nic. Gorram . 444
160 — 161. Vincent Historialis, James of Beneventum . . . 445
162—163. John of Luxemburg, J. Sterngasse .... 446
Franciscans : —
164—165. Rob. Conton, Barth. de Pisis 447
166. Jac. de Casali . . 448
Contents. xiii
Augustinians : — PAGE
167. Bernard Oliver! . . . . . • ,. * . ,< . 443
168 — 169. John Teutonicus, Henry de Vrimaria . . . . 449
171. John Clivoth of Saxony . . . . ^ . . 451
172. John Stringarius . . 452
Cistercians : —
173. John Calcar [qu. de Cervo] . . . . . . . 453
174 — 175. John Monachus ; writer of Sermones Soccii . . 454
176. Mag. Garric . ,.v ,'-.*. . . . . 455
Analysis of Card, de Turrecremata's " Treatise on the truth of the
Conception of the most Blessed Virgin, as a relation to he
made before the fathers of the Council of Basle, July,
A.D. 1437, compiled at the mandate of the legates of the
Apostolic See, presiding over the said Council " . . 456 — 518
Addenda ". C\ . . . . . 519
ERRATA.
P. 250, line 18, for ought to be held as heretical, who read one who
holds it ought to be accounted heretical, who
— — , — 20, after for ever ? add None certainly.
— — t note 2, add [printed wrongly for 118].
— 262, line 2, for She read The dawn
— 265, — IS, for went read goefh
— 266, — 3, for when read since
— 267, — 16, for waste read waste 9
— — , — 2f),for consumption 9 read conception
— 268, — 21, for a Bishop read Archbishop
— 316, — 25, for ^nw^ov, read i
— 340, — 17, for 304, read 384
LETTER,
MY DEAREST FEIEND,
First, let me thank you for the love shewn
in your letter, a love which was such joy to my
youth, and now is so cheering to my old age.
2. Next let me say, that I should indeed have
thought it not rude only but insolent, to imply that
" writing does not become " you. In the sentences
which you quote, I was thinking, partly (as I said)
of myself, " had the English Church, by accepting
heresy, driven me out of it," partly, of an unprac-
tical habit of mind of some who have gone over to
the Koman Church, because they could accept the
letter of the Council of Trent in their own sense.
Nothing has been further from my mind than any
criticism of yourself, whom I still admire as well as
love.
3. But neither, on that account, have I ever
meant to identify you, in your present position,
b 2
4 Personal explanations.
with any thing which I may say. In writing my
" historical preface " to Tract 90, which you kindly
permitted me to re-publish, " I purposely abstained
from consulting you upon the subject, in order not to
identify you with any thing in it." I dwell, indeed,
on the sunny memories of those bright days of early
or middle life, when we were fighting altogether
the same battle (for against unbelief we are fighting
the same battle still), when not our hearts only and
our affections were (as they now are) one, but our
thoughts also. But I did not mean to use your
name, in order to identify you in the least now
with any thing which I think or say.
4. In alleging those passages from the Fathers,
which " state or imply that the faith is contained in
Holy Scripture " (p. 336 sqq.), I had no idea of any
controversy with Rome. In the whole of this part
of my Eirenicon, I was purely on the defensive. It
is, I think, not uncommon with Roman Catholic
controversialists, to give to our Vlth Article an un-
Catholic sense. I meant simply to maintain that
its teaching is identical with that of the Fathers.
It had been said that "the Church of England
weakens the hold of the truths which it teaches, by
detaching them from the Divine voice of the
Church." I meant to maintain that the Church of
England does hold a Divine authority in the Church,
to be exercised in a certain way, deriving the truth
from Holy Scripture, following Apostolical tradition,
under the guidance of God the Holy Ghost. I fully
Personal explanations, 5
believe that there is no difference between us in
this. The " quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab
omnibus," which our own Divines have so often
inculcated, contains, I believe, the self-same doctrine
as is laid down in the Council of Trent upon tradi-
tion. It was in pure honesty, and as a matter of
fact, that I stated that, for some of the passages
(which I did not know by my own reading), I
was indebted to your most valuable notes on St.
Athanasius.
But I am glad that this reference to yourself has
brought out your own clear expression of the identity
of the belief of Roman Catholics and Anglicans on
this point. Your whole statement entirely expresses
our belief. I may, in token of that agreement,
transfer one clear sentence to these pages.
" "We [you] mean — that not every article of faith is so con-
tained there [in Holy Scripture], that it may thence be logically
proved, independently of the teaching and authority of the
Tradition ; but Anglicans mean that every Article of faith is
so contained there, that it may thence be proved, provided there
be added the illustrations and compensations of Tradition V
These explanations are towards yourself. There
are three graver matters which concern myself:
1. That, in your own eyes and those of Roman
Catholics, I have, under the name of an Eirenicon,
been, in fact, to speak plainly, as aggressive as an
Exeter-Hall2 controversialist. 2. That I have
withheld the expression of my faith in regard to
1 Letter, p. Lk 3 Letter, p. 10.
6 Objects of the Eirenicon, fyc.
the Mother of my Lord. 3. That in writing on a
quasi-authoritative system in regard to her, which I
set forth as our chief difficulty, I have, in fact, inserted
more or less from persons who are of no weight.
All this you have said with your usual tender-
ness ; but to this it comes in substance ; and I am
glad of the opportunity of explaining myself.
1. My book had necessarily a two-fold aspect. It
was a defence of ourselves against what, amid all
courteousness of language, was a root-and-branch
attack upon the Church of England, ascribing to
her more of evil, and less of good, than any publi-
cation I had happened to see. In answer to this,
I claimed to her all the broad outlines of faith
which you too have, and, (as I trust, truly,) I set
aside many things which are the ordinary subjects of
Protestant attack upon you. It has been so far said
of my book, that, as far as it should have influence,
it would change the character of the controversy.
But, having done this, I was bound in conscience
to my own people to say why I remain where 1 am,
and why I not only think the Church of England
justified in not accepting the only terms now open
to her — viz. simple and absolute submission, in-
cluding the reception of that whole practical system,
which is, I believe, the ground why she remains apart ;
but also trust that Almighty God has an office for
her, in His over-ruling Providence, in regard to that
same system. Yet I trusted that the exposition of
this might still be without offence. For I pointed
Objects of the Eirenicon, fyc* 7
out, that those things which are a " crux " to me,
and, I believe, to our people generally, are not de
fide among you ; so that I thought I could not be
considered as attacking the Church of Rome itself.
I called the whole an Eirenicon, to show what my
real animus was ; what, in my own mind, underlay
the whole. I meant the name to be the key to
what necessarily was very miscellaneous. Whatever
else there was in the book, and whatever appear-
ances some of it might wear, I wished to say, that
although I had been put upon the defensive, and
although, in parrying a death-thrust, I could hardly
help wounding, what I bond fide aimed at, as the
ultimate result of all, was " peace." Plainly, if the
Roman Church were wholly in the right, we should
be wholly in the wrong; which I could not think;
else, of course, I should not be where I am. But
(which is the centre of all) I meant to suggest,
that this state of things was not irremediable ; that
there was a way, whereby peace and intercommunion
might be restored, through mutual explanations,
without calling upon the Church of Rome to aban-
don any thing which she had pronounced to be
" de fide." The writer of the first article in the
Weekly Register seized my meaning, and I am
grateful to him for it.
At the same time seeing, in that remarkable
collection of Episcopal letters 3 on the question of
3 The Pareri dell' "Episcopate Cattolico, <fec.
8 No imputations intended ; yet language
defining, as " de fide," the doctrine of the Imma-
culate Conception, how tenderly many of the Bishops
felt towards those who are not in the Roman Com-
munion, and how much they desired not to aggravate
their difficulties, I hoped that it would not he
taken amiss, if I stated, in all its breadth, what,
in that system which is our special difficulty,
startled and repelled us. I did not use (as you
will bear me witness) one word of declamation. I
meant the statements to be simply of historical
facts, if I may include under the term " historical,"
and simply as facts, the anticipations of influential
writers in the Roman Communion of a large de-
velopement of the cultus of the Blessed Virgin. In
putting together these facts, nothing was further
from my mind than to pass any opinion whatever,
as to the writers whom I quoted. I simply wished
to exhibit the picture of practical devotion to the
Blessed Virgin, as it was reflected to me in their
writings, and it did not even occur to me that I
could be thought thereby to pass any opinion as to
the inner life of those whose words were cited.
When I heard that my not expressing this was
thought to be unjust to holy men whom I quoted,
I took the first opportunity which occurred to say,
that I did not mean, to impute to any, of them
that " they took from our Lord any of the love
which they gave to His Mother."
In saying this, I may add, I hope without offence,
that their language does appear to me self-contra-
spoken of, contradicted other truth. 9
dictory. They used it, doubtless, in the security
that they could not be misunderstood. Perhaps, if
they had been writing for us English, or among us,
they would not have used it. Still, the grammatical
meaning of the words does not, in many cases, bear
any softening. When S. Alphonso quotes from
writers, following in part S. Thomas Aquinas, the
statement, " The Father gave all judgment to
the Son, and the whole office of mercy He gave to
the Mother 4," this antithesis is not explained, but
contradicted by the statement, that "her tender-
ness and compassion for men are but a drop from
the boundless ocean of the infinite Mercy of Jesus
Christ, her Son and her God 5." If it is said, " 6 The
greater luminary is Christ, who presides over the
just; the lesser luminary is Mary, who is set over
sinners ;" the antithesis is misleading, if it be not
meant that Mary has some special office towards sin-
ners which our Lord has not : the more so, when it is
added ; " since then Mary is this propitious moon
to sinners, if any miserable man finds himself
fallen into the night of sin, let him behold the
moon; let him pray to Mary." It is, of course,
not said "pray to her" exclusively; but the sinner
is said to have " lost the light of the Sun," i. e.
Jesus, " by losing Divine grace," and is not directed
to seek Him Whom he had lost, but Mary. Or
4 Glories of Mary, T. i. p. 81.
6 Note of transl., Ibid. (Not in former translations.)
6 Card. Hugo in Glories of Mary, C. 3. § 2. T. i. p. 184.
10 Ground of adducing language as to B. F.,
when it is said to her 7, " Therefore hast thou been
chosen from eternity to be the Mother of God, that
thy mercy might procure salvation for those, whom
the justice of thy Son could not save;" it seems to
me, that the writer, in his vehement desire to set
forth the privileges of Mary, contradicted the truth
which he himself held, if he believed that the
mercy of Jesus could save them.
If, by any choice of words, I could have softened
the pain of such statements, you must know how
gladly I would have done it. But the pain lay in
the subject itself. And no other way occurred to
me, than that which I adopted, of giving the state-
ments which presented difficulties to me, in the
words of the writers, with only so much of ob-
servation as should serve to indicate wherein the
difficulty pressed upon us.
But my object was a practical one. I knew that
in thousands of English minds (I doubt not, that
in millions), this and the like language is the great
barrier against re-union. I have often (though you
will smile perhaps at the advocacy) had to defend
the Roman Church against being idolatrous, and
that, on the ground of this and the like language.
I wished to make out our case to you, not against
you. I held to what I had put down at the outset,
that if the Roman Church could declare to be de
fide, that only which the Council of Trent laid
7 De Pr&s. Beatse Virgin,, quoted as S. Chrysostom's or
,S. Ignatius'.
cited from books in use in England. 11
down, as explained by Divines of repute among
you (especially in this country), one chief obstacle
to re-union would be removed. And so, as circum-
stances induced me to accumulate the evidence of
what we wished to be protected against, I thought
with myself, "Well, they have but to disown it,
and it will be so much gained."
But, let me say, that in three instances only (which
I will explain presently) I went to any book not
in use in England. The authorities which I
quote, the two Bernardines, Suarez, &c», were
all taken from S. Alphonso, just as they lay in his
book, only translated. And this book was in
English. The third edition of the English version
of his " Glories of Mary," came into my hands, (I
know not how,) just as I was finishing my defence
of Tract 90 in 1841. I had used Archbishop
Ussher's extracts, to illustrate what our Articles
meant by the Invocation of Saints which they con-
demned, but little thinking to impute them to Home
at the present day, I thought that they belonged
to past times. I said that I had hoped that "they
were the exaggerations of individual minds, and that
it was not fair to charge them as teaching, now
received in the Roman Church." But in "the
Glories of Mary " I found the self-same quotations,
which I had before found in Archbishop Ussher,
so that not only the general system remained the
same, but there was a stream of authorities, which
flowed on from generation to generation. The
12 Citations, mostly nothing new now.
traditional system was sustained by the same tra-
ditional authorities.
The extracts I gave professedly on S. Liguori's
authority, only here and there giving the name of
the real author quoted (as Eadmer instead of St.
Anselm) ; and this too (I may say) not on my own
authority, but on that of the Benedictines. Indeed,
although some Roman writers speak of me as laying
down that "this is not genuine," &c., I believe that
on one occasion only, and that not in controversy,
I was obliged to use my own discrimination 8. Else
I have rested implicitly on the judgment of such
critics as the Benedictines.
I did not rend the passages from their context.
Whatever modification any of them may have had
originally, from the circumstances under which they
were written, this was entirely removed by the fact
of their having been transplanted among us.
Although written for Italians9 chiefly, they were
translated into English. The quotations from the
Bernardines,&c., became, I thought, a sort of received
sayings, or first principles on the subjects on which
8 This one instance was in my work, " The Doctrine of the
Real Presence from the Fathers," in which I extracted passages
from those Sermons only of S. Augustine, published by Card.
Mai, which I myself believed to be genuine. I could not do
otherwise. But this was in defence of the "real objective
Presence." In saying that Ipsa (Gen. iii. 15) was a mistake
for Ipse (for which E. Grallwey censures me, " The Lady Chapel,"
&c., p. 51), I alleged the great Roman Catholic critic, De Rossi.
6 Dr. Newman's Letter, p. 110.
Grounds of additions. 13
they had written or preached. They had been
Italian devotions ; they now were naturalized in
England. Weary and sick of the controversy, I, so
far, did nothing in my Eirenicon, but extract anew
the passages which I had before quoted in my
defence of Tract 90, and in the notes to a sermon
on the Rule of faith, now fourteen years ago.
Principles, which had been enunciated of late, (I
thought, for the first time,) alone occasioned me to
do more. These principles were: 1) that it was
for the good of the Church, to decree honours to
the blessed Virgin, as gaining fresh favours from
her; 2) that there ought to be an immense increase
of devotion to her, and that Priests ought to incul-
cate it; 3) that whatever, being so inculcated,
became popularly received in the Church, was
infallibly true ; or, as some of the Bishops expressed
it, that the " quod ubique " was in itself a proof of
the "quod semper." For if, according to the
Council of Trent, the only sources of faith were
Holy Scripture and really Apostolic tradition, and
if what came to be taught popularly every where
in the Roman Church was infallibly true, then, if
it had not the authority of Holy Scripture, it must
of necessity be assumed to have that of tradition.
And there is a large body of teaching, against which
it would be difficult to find any opposed tradition,
on the ground that it did not bear directly on
any doctrine, which would occasion it to be
contradicted.
14 Title of co-Redemptress used extensively.
Now, in the official answers of Bishops of Italy,
Sicily, Sardinia, Spain1, I found that the doctrine,
that the Blessed Virgin is our " co-Redemptress,"
was received in those countries which were of old
most anxious that her Immaculate Conception should
be declared to be matter of faith. Why should this
too, I thought, not be declared to be matter of faith,
since to honour the Blessed Virgin was considered
an adequate ground for so declaring a belief, which
was popularly received ? And if so, this would be
a fresh difficulty in the way of re- union. But, as
I did not understand the meaning of the title
(with which I had become acquainted in studying
those responses of the Bishops, as an index of the
present mind in the Roman Church), I went to
Salazar to learn it.
Almost the only other foreign writer, whom I
quoted, Oswald, I quoted expressly as not repre-
senting Roman Theology, but as putting forth a
fresh developement. I am thankful to hear that
his book has been condemned. Of course, had I
known this, I should not have quoted him. But I
think it rather hard to be blamed for not knowing
this2, or for not looking in the Index to ascertain the
fact, when I had no ground to imagine it. I met
with quotations from Oswald in a German work;
wishing to ascertain their correctness, I obtained
his own book in the ordinary way of trade, and
•
1 Eirenicon, pp. 151 — 153.
8 By Mr. Rhodes in the Weekly Eegister.
Presence of something of the B. V. in Eucharist. 15
read it. Why should I suspect a book to be in
the Index, which eminent Eoman Divines, who
spoke of it, did not know to be there ? But after
all, though he said strange things, the central
point, for which I quoted him, seems to me to lie
in what Faber reports to have been a revelation
to S. Ignatius Loyola 3.
I wished to see whether what I found in Oswald
and Faber, of the presence of something of the
Blessed Virgin in the Holy Eucharist, occurred in
other writers. And so I took up the third foreign
book, which I quoted, believing him to be popular
among your preachers, as he is, I think, among ours,
Corn, a Lapide. To me he seemed explicitly to
teach the same, on two grounds ; first, what seemed
to me an assertion of dogma. " The Blessed Virgin
feeds all with her own flesh, equally with the Flesh
of Christ in the Eucharist4;" secondly, that from
this feeding with her own flesh is derived the
transfusion of the graces of the Blessed Virgin
into pious communicants. "And hence" (it is
from her so "feeding them with her own flesh
equally with the Flesh of Christ,") "that love of
virginity and angelic purity in those who worthily
and frequently communicate." The maker of the
Index to a Lapide understood him, as I did5.
3 Eirenicon, pp. 171, 172.
4 Ib., p. 171.
6 " Ejus carnem in Yen. Eucharistia edimus," v. E.
Maria. I see that a Lapide' s work is being re-published in a
cheap form.
16 Oakeley's justification of the doctrine.
This too Oakeley justifies : "In the same sense,
surely, in which we say that the blood of our
parents and ancestors flows in our veins (those
physical changes notwithstanding), and with the
necessary limitation expressed above, we may also
say, and truly say, that the blood of the Blessed
Virgin was in her Son from first to last, and is,
therefore, in that wondrous communication of
Himself which He makes to us in the Blessed
Eucharist 6."
I do not think that this is what those writers
meant, since they insisted that the blood was
unchanged, and it is open to the fatal objection
urged by Raynaud, whom you quote 7, (and I think
I remember the same in Suarez,) that then, (as
Oakeley's defence too implies,) not the blood of the
Blessed Virgin only, but that of her parents, and
their parents in turn, must have been present too,
the evil consequences of which theory Eaynaud
points out.
De Montfort I quoted, as being an approved
writer, although recently published among us, and
as one from whom a great impulse to that universal
devotion, which was to characterize the new " age of
Mary8," was expected. The Preface to his book
contained the statement that " The MS. has been
examined at Rome . . . most minutely examined as to
B Letter to Archbishop Manning, p. 23.
T Letter, p. 137.
8 Faber, quoted Eirenicon, p. 116.
De Montfort, Faber. 17
its doctrine, and declared to be exempt from all
error which could be a bar to his canonization. ''
So that I have been accused of presumption in
demurring to any teaching 9, which had at least this
negative sanction l. I know not how much this sanc-
tion amounts to. It could not, I suppose, involve an
authoritative approbation of all in his book ; else,
a similar sanction of the works of S. Thomas would
involve a sanction of his denial of the Immaculate
Conception. But if it did not authoritatively sanction
all, neither, of necessity, did it sanction that which
I cited; yet, with that general approbation and the
strong commendation of Faber, it was no obscure
nor uninfluential work, from which I extracted.
With regard to Faber himself, (whose memory
I too cherish, and from whom I thankfully own
that I have learned much,) I did not mean, that
" the wide diffusion of" his " works, arose out of his
particular sentiments about the Blessed Virgin 2 ; "
0 Letter in the "Weekly Eegister.
1 Since this has been in type, Bishop TJllathorne has
pointed out (Weekly Eegister, April 21), that one form of
devotion recommended by De Montfort, has been condemned,
that of " wearing little iron chains, as a badge of their loving
slavery," by "those who made themselves slaves of Jesus and
Mary." But the condemnation had no special reference to
any devotion to the Blessed Virgin, since the use of such
chains was equally prohibited, when employed to symbolize
that the wearer was SovAos 'I^o-ov Xpicrrov, lit. " the slave of
Jesus Christ," as St. Paul says (Eom. i. 1). It must have
been, I suppose, something in the symbol, or its use, inde-
pendent of the thing symbolized, which was condemned.
3 Letter, p. 25.
B
18 Object of gathering into one
I meant only, that he seemed to me to use the well-
deserved influence, which he gained through that
rich variety of natural and spiritual gifts wherewith
God endowed him, to the promotion of an extreme
cultus of the Blessed Virgin, and that, unless there
were something to counterhalance it, the wide
diffusion of his writings made him an important
element in the future course of English and foreign
Roman Catholic devotion to her.
My object was, as I said, towards, not against
you. Speaking in the name of many (as I did), I
hoped that those Roman Catholic Bishops, who, for
love's sake, were unwilling to create any difficulty
in the minds of those who wish to be one with
them, might restrain those of their brethren who
ignore us, or who look upon the healing of this
division as hopeless.
But, in all this, I did not utter one word of
censure. I could not but express my feeling of the
seriousness of it. I wrote, as one in earnest for
others who were in earnest. It was our case, why
we wished to have some formula framed, which, by
its very character, should tacitly shew that all this
was not "de fide/' that in case of re-union, we
should be exempt from teaching, such as Faber was
using all his well- merited influence to naturalize
among us. Indeed I believe that the only " strong-
saying" in my book, is one which you say, I
"bring to life, after it had long been in its grave."
I thought that it had been interred so long, that
the devotions as to the B. V. 19
no one would know it again, or have guessed its
parent, else I would not have quoted it ; and
now that you have revealed its author, I shall
take the first opportunity to remove it. I only
used it, as an illustration how deep the feeling
was among us, since " one who appreciated highly
what is good and holy in the Roman Church " had
used it.
Oakeley speaks of even the most extreme state-
ments, which I quoted, as held to be ' " s doctrinally
defensible by many excellent Catholics, who yet would
hesitate to adopt them as the rule of their language
and habits of thought on the subject of our Blessed
Lady." He even anticipates their ultimate general
adoption, as the result of their having been brought
together. "4 He [I] will lead many to the conclusion
that the love and cultus of the Blessed Virgin must
either be an extreme or a nullity ; that, unless we
are prepared to degrade her office, as the Mother of
our Redeemer and the great instrument of that
dispensation whence flow all blessings to the human
race, we cannot stop short of ascribing to her even
the most majestic of those titles [I suppose, "Co-
Redemptress," " Co-operatress," " Helper of Christ"
in our salvation,] which have been found for her in
the pious inventions of saintly love." But, if this
be so, I do not see where my supposed fault lies.
3 Letter to the Weekly Kegister.
4 Letter to the Most Eev. H. E. Manning, pp. 20, 21.
B 2
20 Where was the evil?
I set them down as our difficulties, and stated
what made them difficulties to us. Oakeley says
in fact, that they ought not to be difficulties, and
that, he thinks, they must one day be owned, as an
essential part of Christian truth5. But then I
see not what evil I can be supposed to have done,
in putting together, chiefly from a book in familiar
use in this country, passages which contain these
statements, with very little note except the
briefest indication wherein our difficulty lies.
And yet another, who dedicates his sermon to
Oakeley, has no other title for me than that of
" the Accuser 6," ascribing to me, totidem verbis, the
character of Satan \ while he himself puts into my
5 Oakeley anticipates also, that the re-union of England in
visible communion with the Roman Church would, without
some provision, issue in our being involved in these and all the
other doctrines which I deprecated. He says, (Letter, p. 53,)
" Here Dr. P. is met by a serious practical difficulty. If the
Pope is to exercise in a re-united England the power which he
claims all over the world, of controlling the appointments to the
Episcopate, it is quite certain that the Bishops so nominated or
at least accepted by him will, ivith the priests, who are their
subjects, be the instruments of flooding England with the devo-
tions to which Dr. P. conscientiously objects." And certainly,
to judge from the writing of him whom he addresses, this would
be so, if there should be no Concordat, and if this section of
Roman theology should be the accurate representative of Rome.
6 Dr. Gallwey, " The Lady Chapel and Dr. P.'s Peacemaker,"
pp. 11—14, 18, 22, 26, 31.
7 " Be not weary yet, for the accuser does not easily tire of
accusing. To the blessed St. John it was revealed that the
accusing spirit accused the brethren by day and by night. He
is not silenced then yet." p. 26.
Belief) as to title " Theotokos" assumed. 21
mouth language which I never used s. Alas ! if I
have, unwittingly, (as you say half-play fully, in order
not to speak as would pain me,) "discharged my
olive branch as if from a catapult," he has wielded
"the lightning of the sword" of the judgment of
Almighty God.
2. But you think that I have been unjust to
myself in not stating what I do believe in regard to
the Blessed Virgin, as well as what I do not be-
lieve, and that, had I so done, my book would have
found less favour with Protestants 9. Certainly, the
last thing which I imagined was, that my book
could find any thing but condemnation at the hands
of those who were really Protestants; and if it has
met with less disfavour than I expected, it is, I
think, owing to the powerful spell which those
words, "re-union of Christendom," must exercise
over every Christian heart. My omission of any
positive statements, in regard to the greatness of
the Blessed Virgin, was partly owing, I suppose,
to my not even imagining that any one could doubt
my belief, since the doctrine expressed by that great
title, Theotokos^ is a matter of faith, an essential part
of the doctrine of the Incarnation. Partly too my
immediate subject was not her eminence, but the
"invocation of saints," — in what way I thought
that the requests for the prayers of the saints would
find entrance among us, and what held us back
8 e. g., p. 27.
9 Letter, pp. 82, 83, 94.
22 The J9. V. a moral, not physical
from entering upon the borders of the system.
Englishmen are apt too much to concentrate
themselves on the single point which they have
in view; and I, I suppose, exaggerated an infirmity
incidental to me as an Englishman.
Yet, in one respect, my own words have conveyed
to you a meaning utterly different from what was
in my mind. I said, "what was said of her [the
Blessed Virgin] by the Fathers as the chosen vessel
of the Incarnation, was [by later writers] applied
personally to her." I seemed to you to be speak-
ing of the Blessed Virgin as " the physical instru-
ment only of the Incarnation." This had not
occurred to me. The contrast in my own mind,
which I expressed, I suppose, the less clearly,
because I had expressed it so often, and presup-
posed it as known, was quite different from this.
I meant two things; (1) that later writers apply to
her present office, by virtue of her intercession,
language which the Fathers used in regard to her
office, which she through grace accepted, of be-
coming the Mother of her and our Redeemer;
(2) that besides /Aw co-operation in the salvation
of mankind, which Holy Scripture speaks of as the
result of her free and engraced will, Salazar and
others speak (as I cited him) of a co-operation,
all along, in our Lord's own proper work of our
Redemption, in a way of which Holy Scripture and,
I may add surely, tradition hint nothing.
But it never occurred to me to think of the
instrnnu nt only of Incarnation. 23
Blessed Virgin otherwise than as n moral instru-
ment of our common redemption. Almighty God
employs His rational creatures only as moral in-
struments ; much more, in that central act whereby
He restored our race, and, in us, united His crea-
tures with Himself.
I have indeed thought it an exaggeration, when
some writers of books of devotion have delighted to
dwell on the Incarnation, as though our redemption
depended upon the "fiat" of Mary. For, although
God, — in conformity with that His wondrous con-
descension, whereby He reverences (if I may so
speak) the free will with which He has endowed us,
and will not force our will — would not accomplish
the Incarnation without the free will of His crea-
ture, yet, of course, there was nothing really in
suspense. Had He indeed, amid the manifold
failures which He has allowed in His work of
grace, willed to allow this scope also to free-will,
that it should reject the privilege of being Theo-
tokos, and so have offered it to one who would not
accept it, the Incarnation might have been delayed
for a while; it could not have failed. But He did
not so will. He, in all eternity, we both believe,
foreordained her who was to be Theotokos, Geni-
trix Dei, the Mother of God. He, in time, created
her; He endowed her with all those qualities, with
which it was fitting that she should be endowed, in
whom, " when Thou tookest upon Thee to deliver
man, Thou didst not abhor the Virgin's womb."
24 The B. V. a moral, not physical
It was indeed, in my young days, a startling
thought, when it first flashed upon me, that it
must be true, that one, of our nature, which is the
last and lowest of God's rational creation, was
raised to a nearness to Almighty God, above all
the choirs of Angels or Archangels, Dominions or
Powers, above the Cherubim, who seem so near to
God, or the Seraphim with their burning love, close
to His Throne *. Yet it was self-evident, as soon as
stated, that she, of whom He deigned to take His
77 O
Human Flesh, was brought to a nearness to Him-
self above all created beings ; that she stood single
and alone, in all creation or all possible creations,
in that, in her womb, He Who, in His Godhead, is
Consubstantial with the Father, deigned, as to His
Human Body, to become Consubstantial with her.
In S. Proclus' eloquent language, which you quote
in part : —
" Traverse in thought, 0 man, the creation, and see if there
is any thing equal to or greater than the holy Virgin, who bare
God. Compass the earth, survey the sea, search the air, track
the heavens in thought ; consider all the invisible powers, and
see whether there is any other such marvel in all creation.
For the heavens declare the glory of God ; the angels serve
with fear ; the archangels worship with trembling ; the Cheru-
bim, not sustaining, quiver; the Seraphim, flying around, ap-
proach not ; and trembling cry, ' Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord of
hosts ; heaven and earth are full of His praise.' The clouds
in awe became the chariot of the Resurrection ; Hell in fear
cast forth the dead ; — count over the miracles, and admire the
victory of the Virgin ; for Whom all creation hymned with fear
1 I see this in a sermon which I preached twelve years ago,
instrument only of Incarnation. 25
and trembling, she alone inexplicably housed. Blessed for
her sake are all women. For womankind is no longer under a
curse ; for the race has received That wherefrom it shall sur-
pass the Angels in glory. Eve is healed 2," &c.
Yet she too had her trials. Nor, when I spoke of
her as " the chosen vessel of the Incarnation," did
I by that term, which I took from Holy Scripture,
mean any other than a moral instrument. Great
must that trial have been, whereby she believed
what was, according to the laws of nature, im-
possible, and on the ground of what with God only
was possible, risked the reproach 3 among men, with
which the poor Jews still blaspheme her Son and
revile herself. She too was perfected through trial,
and her belief in God was the first step in the
undoing of the evil brought upon us through Eve's
unbelief in God and belief in the evil one.
And, doubtless, any imaginations of ours must
come short of the truth, if we would picture to our-
selves the superhuman, engraced beauty of the soul
of her whom God vouchsafed to create, so alone in
His whole creation, whose being ever lay in His
eternal Counsels, who must have been in His Divine
Mind, when, in all eternity, He contemplated the
way in which He should unite His rational creation
to Himself, redeeming our fallen race ; from whom
He, Who should be God and Man, was to derive
2 Orat. vi. in S. Deip. pp. 342, 343.'
3 Celsus has it (in Orig. c. Cels. i. 20), and Origen him-
self has more, yet agreeing with the Talmud. (Ib, n. 32.)
26 Meaning of titles of the B. V. used
His Human Flesh, and in His Sacred Childhood to
be subject to her.
And in regard to that solemn act, whereby she
became the mother of our Lord, with one addition,
which you hold, though, as self-evident, you do not
mention it, your words express my belief also. —
"4They [the Fathers] declare that she co-operated in our
salvation, not merely by the descent of the Holy Ghost upon
her body, but by specific holy acts, the effect of the Holy Ghost
upon her soul ; that, as Ere forfeited privileges by sin, so Mary
earned privileges by the fruits of grace ; that, as Eve was a
cause of ruin to all, Mary was a cause of salvation to all ; that,
as Eve made room for Adam's fall, so Mary made room for our
Lord's reparation of it ; and thus, whereas the free gift was
not as the offence, but much greater, it follows that, as Eve
co-operated in effecting a great evil, Mary co-operated in
effecting a much greater good."
That one self-evident addition is, that the Blessed
Virgin, by her faith in Him Whom, on and through
her faith, she conceived and bore, gained her own
redemption as well as ministered to ours. I say
this, because so many writers, in their zeal to exalt
her, speak of her co-operating in our salvation,
of her longing for it, as if they forgot that she
needed redemption as much as we; that the Blood,
shed for the redemption of the world, was shed for
hers also.
Further, my only difficulty in adopting any of
the great titles which, as you say, the Fathers have
given to the Blessed Virgin, is my impression that,
4 Letter, pp. 38, 39.
by the Fathers, recast. Two classes. 27
in the popular devotions, those titles which alone
would come into question here, have received a
different meaning from that in which the Fathers
used them; and so that I should be speaking the
language of other days which would be understood
as it has been moulded by later usage. I should be
using coin which had been re-stamped. The titles
which the Fathers give to the Blessed Virgin fall,
I think, into two classes, — those which shadow her
perpetual Virginity before, in, and after, the Birth,
and those which speak of her as conceiving and
bearing God. Of the first there is no question, and
they, I think, seldom occur in modern books of
devotion. Those other great terms, great as they
were, were, I believe, but weaker expressions of that
one word, Theo tokos. They were so many colours
evolved out of that central light. She was the
Mother of our Redeemer, and so from her, as the
fountain of His Human Birth, came all which He
did and was to us. Thus she was "the Mother
of Life," because she was the Mother of Him Who
is our Life; she was "the gate of Paradise," be-
cause she bore Him Who restored us to our lost
Paradise ; " the gate of Heaven," because He, born
of her, " opened the kingdom of Heaven to all be-
lievers ;" she was " the all-undefiled Mother of holi-
ness," because " the Holy One born of her was called
the Son of God ;" the " light-clad Mother of light,"
because He Who indwelt her and was born of her,
was "the true Light, which lighteth every man
28 Great titles given by Fathers to the B. V.
that cometh into the world." And in like way,
that other title, " staff of orthodoxy," has, I suppose,
reference to that truth, which we suppose to lie as
the foundation of the blessing to St. Peter, that the
belief in the Incarnation, in our Lord, God and Man,
which he has confessed, would be the impregnable
strength of the Church. In the well-known words
of S. Fulgentius, " 5 It is certain that almost all the
errors of heretical pravity have hence manifoldly
stolen in upon some, that the great mystery of
godliness, which was manifested in the flesh, justi-
fied in the spirit, appeared to Angels, preached to
the Gentiles, believed in the world, received up in
glory, some do not believe as it is, or altogether
disbelieve."
And so, as to all the language which you have
quoted from S. Cyril, I adopt it all, but I think,
from the context, that I adopt it rightly, as ex-
pressing in different ways, that one central truth,
of which S. Cyril was God's chosen champion, the
s ad Tras. i. 4. This, I understand to be the meaning of the
Antiphone,"cunctas hsereses sola interemisti in universe mundo"
(Off. Parv. B. M.). I did not criticise the Antiphone (Eiren.
p. 124), as one of niy critics has objected to me. The use of
the past, "thou slewest," shows that the reference is to a past
act, such as was the Incarnation, which, rightly believed, is the
destruction of all heresies. I only spoke historically of its ap-
plication to her present personal power, an expectation which I
found repeated very often in the " Pareri," that she, " the de-
stroyer of all heresies," would, on the declaration of her Imma-
culate Conception, destroy them. " I would she did!" said a very
eminent foreign Divine; "but there they are, rife everywhere."
related to fruits of Incarnation. 29
Incarnation; — that He Whom she bare, was not
Man only, as Nestorius blasphemed, but the Very
and Eternal God.
" 6 Hail, holy Mother of God, majestic treasure of the whole
world, the lamp unquenchable, the crown of virginity, the staff
of orthodoxy, the indissoluble temple and dwelling-place of the
Incomprehensible, Mother and Virgin, through whom He is
named in the Gospels ' Blessed, Who cometh in the Name of
the Lord.' Hail, thou who containedst in thy holy Virgin
womb the Uncontainable ; through whom the Holy Trinity is
glorified and worshipped throughout the whole world ; through
whom heaven is gladdened ; through whom Angels and Arch-
angels are rejoiced ; through whom devils are put to flight ;
through whom the devil, tempting, fell from heaven ; through
whom the fallen creature is received up into heaven ; through
whom the whole creation, bound by the madness of idolatry,
has come to the knowledge of the truth ; through whom holy
Baptism accrueth to believers ; through whom, the oil of
gladness; through whom throughout the world churches are
founded; through whom the Gentiles are brought to re-
pentance ; and why say more ? through whom the Only-
Begotten Son of God shone to them who sat in darkness and
in the shadow of death."
Or, to take a much later, and to me unknown,
writer, to whom I have already been referred,
as though he were Hesychius of Jerusalem 7 ;
" Every well-meaning tongue greets, as is meet, the Virgin
and Deipara, and imitates, as he may, the Archangel Gabriel.
And one, bids her Hail ; another addresses her, ' The Lord is
from thee,' on account of Him "Who was born from her, and ap-
6 Opp. T. v. P. ii. pp. 355, 356. I have followed in some
slight things a text amended from MSS. collated by my son,
which I mention lest certain critics should accuse me of
falsifying.
7 Bibl. Vet. Patr., Paris, 1621, ii. 421.
30 Great titles given by Fathers to the B. V.
peared in flesh to the race of man. the Lord. One calleth her
'Mother of light;' another, 'Star of Life;' another calleth her
' Throne of Grod ;' another, ' temple greater than the heavens ;'
another, ' seat not less than the seat over the Cherubim ;' another
again, 'garden, unsown, fruitful, untilled ;' 'vine of goodly
cluster, flourishing intact;' 'pure turtle;' 'dove uudefiled;'
' cloud of rain conceiving incorruptibly ;' case, whose Pearl
was brighter than the sun ; mine, from which the Stone, which
filleth the whole earth, goeth forth, no one cutting it out;
ship, full of its Burden, needing no pilot ; enriching treasure.
Others, in like way, call her ' closed lamp, enkindled from
ifcself;' 'ark, wider, longer, more glorious than that of Noah;'
that was an ark of living creatures, this of Life ; that of perish-
able being, this of imperishable Life ; that bare Noah, this, the
Maker of Noah ; that had second and third stories, this, the
whole fulness of the Trinity, since the Spirit came upon her
and the Father overshadowed her and the Son, borne in the
womb, indwelt her. For he saith, ' The Holy Ghost shall come
upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow
thee ; therefore also the Holy Thing born of thee, shall be
called the Son of God.' Thou seest how great and what the
dignity of the Yirgin Deipara. For the Only-Begotten Son of
Grod, the Maker of the world, was carried by her as a Child,
and re-formed Adam and sanctified Eve, and destroyed the
serpent, and opened Paradise, and kept safe the seal of the
womb," &c.
Hence too S. Proclus, or whoever he was, calls
her " 8 the holy shrine of Sinlessness ; the sanctified
temple of God ; the golden altar of whole burnt
offerings ; the precious alabaster of the pure oint-
ment;— the gate looking eastward, which, through
the entrance and exit of the king, was closed for
ever ; — the field, blessed of the Father, wherein the
Treasure of the dispensation of the Lord lay; — the
8 Orat. vi. pp. 378—380. Letter, pp. 72, 128.
related to fruits of Incarnation. 31
beautiful spouse of the Canticles which modestly
received in her chamber the heavenly Bridegroom ;
the tabernacle of the faithful, which received the
living Ark of the covenant; the tabernacle of
witness, wherefrom the true Jesus, being God,
went forth after His nine months' sojourn ; — the
undefiled fleece, placed on the threshing-floor of the
world, wherein the saving rain, coming down from
heaven, dried the whole earth from the boundless
tide of evils; — the fruitful olive, planted in the
house of God, from which the Holy Ghost, taking
the branch of the Body of the Lord, brought It to
the tempest-tost race of man, announcing the peace
from above ; the flourishing paradise of immortality,
wherein the Tree of life, being planted, yieldeth to
all, without hindrance, the fruits of immortality ;
the heavenly sphere of the new creation, wherein
the ever-shining Sun of righteousness chased from
every soul all darkness of night." And in the same
reference, I doubt not, he goes on to call her, " the
boast of virgins; the gladness of mothers; the
establishment of the faithful; the diadern of the
Church ; the stamp of orthodoxy ; the seal of piety ;
the rule of truth ; the garment of continency; the
vest of virtue ; the munition of righteousness ; the
dwelling-place of the Holy Trinity; according to tho
Gospel relation, c the Holy Ghost shall come upon
thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow
thee; wherefore also the Holy Thing born of thee
shall be called the Son of God ;' to Him be glory/' &c
32 Great titles given by Fathers to the B. F.
And Theodotus has much the same combination
of images 9 : —
" Hail, saving and spiritual fleece; hail, light-clad
Mother of the unsetting Light; hail, all undefiled
Mother of Holiness; hail, most pellucid fountain
of the life-giving Stream; hail, new Mother in
whom the new Birth was moulded; hail, inex-
plicable mother of Incomprehensibility; hail, ac-
cording to Isaiah, new tome of the new covenant,
whereof the faithful witnesses are angels and men ;
hail, alabaster of the sanctifying ointment; hail,
creation formed to embrace the Creator; hail,
tiniest vessel, containing the Uncontainable," &c.
Such, also, I doubt not from the context, is the
meaning of that highest title of all, which I am
glad to add from your last edition1, out of Basil
of Seleucia, " mediatrix between God and Man."
For the whole context is a paraphrase on the
angelic salutation in reference to the Incarnation,
and the fruits whereof he speaks, are the direct
fruits of the Cross of Christ. "2Hail, engraced one !
Bright be thy countenance ! For from thee shall
be born the Joy of all, and shall make cease
their ancient curse, by loosing the power of death,
and bestowing on all the hope of resurrection.
Hail, engraced one! unfading paradise of chastity,
planted wherein the Tree of life shall bear the
9 In S. Amphiloch. p. 40.
1 Letter, p. 72, ed. 3.
3 Orat. 39, p. 215.
related to fruits of Incarnation. 33
fruits of salvation, whence the four-mouthed foun-
tain of the Gospels shall well forth to believers
streams of mercies. Hail, engraced one! mediat-
ing to God and men, that the middle wall of
enmity may he destroyed, and the things on earth
may be united to the things in heaven3."
Now, in all this, I suppose that there is nothing
which any Anglican who reflected on the term
" Theotokos," would hesitate about (except that we
are unaccustomed to mystical interpretations of
Holy Scripture), if only we were certain that we
should be understood to use them in what I believe
to have been their original meaning, and not to
imply that she was " the gate of Heaven," &c. by
virtue of her present Intercession. Not but that, of
course, she with all the inhabitants of heaven, and
she more eminently than all, does pray for us. The
intercession of the saints departed and at rest, for us
who are still militant, is part of the doctrine of
the Communion of Saints, and would be a necessary
consequence of God-given love, even if it did not
appear from Holy Scripture. The contrary is in-
conceivable. "Not only does the High Priest,"
says Origen 4, " pray with those who pray aright, but
the angels also, who c rejoice in heaven over one
sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and
nine just persons who need no repentance,' and the
souls of the saints who have fallen asleep before
3 Eph. ii. 14, 15.
4 De Orat. n. 11. T. i. pp. 213, 214.
C
34 Intercession of the saints a
us. For seeing that knowledge is made manifest to
those who are worthy in this present life through
a glass darkly, but is there revealed face to face, it
were absurd not to conceive the like of the other
virtues too, that, which has been prepared beforehand
in this life, being perfected then. But one of the
very chiefest virtues, according to the Divine word,
is love to our neighbour, which we must needs con-
ceive must exist in a far higher degree in the saints
who have fallen asleep before us towards those who
are militant in this life, than in those who are yet
beset with human weakness, and who labour together
with those who are deficient. For not here only
is that implanted in those who have brotherly love,
4 if one member suffer, all the members suffer with
it, and if one member be glorified, all the members
rejoice with it.' For it beseemeth that love too,
which is external to this present life, to say, { the
care of all the churches. Who is weak, and I am
not weak? Who is offended, and I burn not?'
Since Christ too confesseth that He is weak in each
of the saints who is weak, and in prison also and a
stranger and a hungered and athirst."
Great indeed is the thought of that glorious com-
pany in all their different orders, whether, as the
blessed Angels, they never fell, or as the Saints,
with whom God has been filling up their broken
ranks, they, " secure of their own safety, are anxious
as to our salvation V And, as the world grows old
* S. Cyprian de mortal, fin.
necessary fruit of perfected love. 35
and the strife with unbelief becomes more deadly.,
and perhaps the last conflict is drawing on, year by
year the number of those increaseth who, beholding
God, pray for us militant on earth. " They that be
with us are more than they that are against us."
But the truth of the intercession of the inhabitants
of Heaven is, as you observe, distinct from their
"invocation." Nay, it would, in itself, rather seem
to supersede it. For we do not ask any one to
do, what we are quite sure, that he does without
our asking. The asking for the prayers of any, living
or departed, implies, that those so asked would pray
for us, if asked, in a way in which otherwise they
would not.
The intercession, then, upon which the difficulty
turns, is not that general intercession of all the
inhabitants of that realm of love and holiness and
vision of our God, for all of us, who are struggling
here, but the special intercession for individuals
obtained by direct prayer to them.
Nor, again, does it turn on the mere fact of
asking for their prayers especially, in the same
way in which we should ask one another's prayers,
it being always understood, (in your Bishop
Milner's words which I have already quoted6,)
" That, as the saints in Heaven are free from
every stain of sin and imperfection, and are con-
firmed in grace and glory, so their prayers are far
more efficacious for obtaining what they ask for,
6 Eirenicon, pp. 100, 101.
C 2
36 Meaning of titles given by Fathers
than are the prayers of us imperfect and sinful
mortals." If this had been all, I have expressed
my conviction that the difficulty never would have
arisen.
The difficulty arose, I believe, in the change of
the meaning of the great terms which the Fathers
used of the Blessed Virgin, looking on to the
Incarnation, in that she was the Mother of our
Redeemer, God-Man, and the transference of those
terms to describe her present influence and power
with Him, her Son. Both interpretations are
allowable among you. I am not accusing. I only
say, from what we wish to be exempt. I am
thankful to see in " The Crown of Jesus/' to which
you referred me, expositions of the great titles
which are concentrated in the Litany of Loretto,
such as every Christian must receive.
11 Mother of Divine Grace, because she is the parent of Him
Who is the Source and Author of all grace ; Seat of Wisdom,
as being replenished with this heavenly virtue, because she is
the Mother of Him "Who is "Wisdom itself; Cause of our Joy,
as being the instrument of that great blessing, which is the
source of all our Christian consolations ; Tower of Ivory, as
being remarkable for the purity of innocence : ivory, by its
whiteness, being the emblem of delicacy, whence that saying
in the Canticles, ' Thy neck is as a tower of ivory ;' Ark of the
Covenant, as being the parent of Him, "Who is the Mediator of
the new Covenant ; Gate of Heaven, as being, again, Mother
of Him, "Who has opened to us the gate of everlasting happiness ;
Morning Star, as being the harbinger of that bright Day which
has brought immortality to light V
i pp. 653, 654.
partly changed ; others added. Effects. 37
Even with these explanations, there still, indeed,
remain the difficulties of some titles, which do not
occur in the Fathers, and which one would have
expected rather to be given to our Lord ; Health
of the weak, Refuge of sinners, Comforter of the
afflicted, Help of Christians. For when a title is
given to any one, we can hardly help thinking that
it is meant "par excellence" to belong to that being
to whom it is given ; that it must, at least, be his
or her's, in some special way in which it can
belong to no one else. Nothing short of this can
justify the title. Even if, in some higher sense, it
could belong to some one else, there must be some
special way in which it must be believed to belong
to that person ; else it would not be given at all.
This title, "Refuge of sinners," is, accordingly,
the text on which S. Liguori puts together the
passages of middle-age writers, or such as are
attributed wrongly to the Fathers, which speak of
her as " the Hope of Sinners." Such sinners seem
to be spoken of as out of the reach of Jesus, or
hopeless of His help, and Mary seems to be held
out to them as the way by which they are to
approach to Jesus 8.
8 See ab, pp. 9, 10. " In the ancient cities of refuge, all cri-
minals did not find refuge ; but under the patronage of Mary,
all sinners find protection, no matter what crimes they may-
have committed ; it is enough for them to take refuge under
her mantle. ' I,' says St. John Damascene in the name of
our queen, ' am the city of refuge of all who flee to me ' (Or.
38 Effects of these changes in the titles
And with this fall in those explanations of the
other titles, which are, I think, more common, as
2 de dorm, [said of the tomb, said not to be his]). Ifc is enough
to have recourse to Mary ; for him who shall have the happiness
to enter this city, it will not be necessary to speak in order to
be saved. * Assemble yourselves, and let us enter into the
fenced city, and let us be silent there' (Jer. viii. 14). This
fenced city is. according to B. Albertus Magnus, the Holy
Virgin fortified in grace and glory. 'And let us be silent
there,' i.e. says the gloss, 'because we do not dare to depre-
cate the Lord, whom we have offended, let her deprecate and
ask.' Hence a devout author (Ben. Fernandez in Gen. iii.)
exhorts all sinners to take shelter under the protection of
Mary ; ' Flee, O Adam, O Eve, flee ye their children, within
the bosom of the Mother, Mary. She is the city of refuge, the
only hope of sinners !' [S. Liguori adds, " after Jesus."] Thus
she is called by St. Augustine, ' Only hope of sinners,' Serm.
18 de Sanct. [not his, see Bened. on T. v. Serm. 194 App.]
Hence S. Ephrem says to Mary, ' Thou art the only advocate
of sinners, and of those bereft of all succour.' Hence he salutes
her, ' Hail, refuge and hospice of sinners, to whom namely
sinners can fly,' de laud. V. [not his]. Eichard of St. Law-
rence also says, ' The Lord complained, before Mary [was
born], "There is no one who riseth up and withholds Me"
(Ezek. xxii.), until Mary was found, who held Him until He was
softened' (Eic. i. 2, de laud. Virg.). The Blessed Virgin her-
self revealed to S. Brigit that ' there is not a sinner so cast off
by God, who, if he invoke me, will not return to God.' Eev.
i. 6 [wrong reference. " How much soever a man sins, if with
his whole heart and true amendment he return to me [the
Blessed Virgin], I am prepared forthwith to receive the peni-
tent. Nor do I consider how much he have sinned, but with
what intention and will he returns." Eev. ii. 23]. 'The
world,' says the devout Blosius, ' has not so execrable a sinner
that she should abominate him and repel him from her, and, if
he pray for her help, not be able, know and will, to reconcile
him to her most beloved Son1 (Bios, de dictis PP. c. 5).
given l)i) the Fathers, 39
in the book which you also name, " The Key of
Heaven." " Tower of ivory, for in the Canticles
thou art that tower of ivory whereunto the fair neck
of the Bride is likened ; for through thee all graces
pass from Christ the Head unto the Church His
Body : Gate of heaven, since through thee salvation
came into the world, and none can enter into heaven
but by thee1"
This change in the meaning of titles, given hy
the Fathers, occasions devotions which (you will
agree with me) the Fathers knew not, and furnishes
their doctrinal basis. For when, instead of its being
said, that " God willed that we should have all
through Mary," i. e. through the Incarnation, it
came to be thought that " God willed that we
should have all through her," or that "through
her," i. e., through her intercession, " God willeth
that all graces should pass from Christ the Head
unto the Church His Body," that doctrine involved
the whole system of teaching as to the office of the
B. V., as our access to our Redeemer, from which
we wish to be exempt. For, setting aside cases
of inculpable ignorance, then, if this were true,
any one who should neglect to ask her, through
Justly then S. John Damascene salutes thee, ' Hail, hope of the
hopeless!' S. Lawrence Justinian, 'Hope of criminals;' S.
Ephrem, ' Safest harbour of the shipwrecked.' The same
saint goes so far as to call thee the * Protectress of those under
sentence of damnation,' " &e. S. Lig. Gl. of M. iii. 2.
1 P. 253.
40 Basis of S. Liguorfs theses.
whom God willed all His graces to come to His
creatures, would be shewing contempt to the
known will of God, and incurring the forfeiture of
all the graces necessary to his salvation. All the
strong language which I extracted from writers
quoted by S. Liguori in support of his thesis, " on
the necessity of invoking the intercession of Mary 2,"
u Mary is our life, because she obtains for us the
pardon of our sins3;" "Mary is our life, because
she obtains for us the gift of perseverance 4 ;"
"Mary is the hope of all5;" "Mary is the hope of
sinners G;" "Mary is the peacemaker of sinners
with God7," are but applications of this one prin-
ciple. Even Suarez goes beyond the Council of
Trent. "8 The Church holds that the intercession
and prayer of the Virgin are useful and necessary
to her above all others [saints] ; the Blessed Virgin
therefore is to be prayed by us above all." For
the Council of Trent only says that it is useful;
Suarez says, that " she is to be prayed to," because
her special intercession (for of this he is speak-
ing), such intercession as is to be gained by prayer
to her, is necessary. And conversely, I suppose,
we may infer that S. Augustine and other Fathers
did not hold that there was any such necessity,
since, as you observe, no prayer to the Blessed
2 C. v. s. 1. 3 C. ii. s. 1. 4 Ib. s. 2.
5 C. iii. s. 1. 6 Ib. s. 2. 7 C. vi. s. 3.
8 In P. iii. q. 37, disp. 23. s. 3, fin., the passage which I took
from S. Liguori.
Points agreed upon, or at issue. 41
Virgin is to be found in the voluminous works of
St. Augustine.
As I said, I do not " accuse." I have never had
any thought that the fact of your having such
prayers would be " 9 compromising to those who
propose entering into communion with" you. I
was only thinking of ourselves, and, as a Priest, of
our people, and I only wish that, in case of reunion,
we should still be allowed to worship, as I believe
that they did, who lived in the times nearest to our
Lord and His Apostles.
The difference, then, does not relate to the
greatness of the sanctification which we may well
believe that God bestowed upon her, whom He
willed to bring into so near a relation to Himself;
nor to the singular eminence to which He willed
thereby to raise her, alone in His whole creation ;
nor to the fact, that she, with all the saints in
glory, intercedes for us; nor to its being permis-
sible, in the way explained by your Bp. Milner above,
to ask for her prayers as we ask for the prayers of
other our fellow-creatures, only, of course, that she is
far more exalted and acceptable to God; but to this,
whether God has constituted her in such sort the
Mediatrix with Him our Mediator, that as we have
no approach to God, except through Jesus, so our
approach to Jesus must be through her; or, again,
as all grace comes to us through Jesus Alone and
9 Letter, p. 155, said of seeking to enter into communion
with thf> Greek Church,
42 Points at issue.
for His merits, so all grace is transmitted from
Him through her; or whether, again, He have
delegated her as the dispensatrix of His graces, (as
the pictures of the Immaculate Conception repre-
sent her no longer, as in the representations of the
Catacombs, holding up her hands to God, but rain-
ing down graces upon us;) or whether she is "the
gate of Heaven" in such sort, that " no one can
enter heaven, unless he pass through Mary as
through a door1;" or again, whether she be "the
hope of sinners," so that the first step for return-
ing sinners is to betake themselves to her, as
their approach to Jesus ; or whether " she restrains
her Son, that He may not inflict chastisement, and
saves sinners2.
It is my fear, that the system of extreme devo-
tion to the B. V. is in the ascendancy.
It seems to me, and I am told, that there is a strong
1 S. Bonav. in S. Lig. Gl. of M. v. i. p. 237.
2 Gl. of M. c. iii. s. 2., quoting from S. Bonaventura, " She
takes hold of her Son, that He may not strike sinners." This
is set before the eyes in the picture of Eubens at Antwerp, in
which our Lord is represented as armed with lightning to dis-
charge it on the world for its wickedness .(denoted by the ser-
pent twined around it), and the Blessed Virgin as holding His
hand, and shewing her breasts, so shewing her claim, as His
Mother, to intercede with Him. S. Liguori, too, quotes (iii. 1.
p. 180.) from S. Bonaventura : " If my Redeemer cast me oft'
for my sins, I will throw myself at the feet of His mother, and
stay there, that she may obtain pardon for me. For she (ipsa)
knows not, how not to have mercy, and never knew, how not
to satisfy the miserable. And therefore, out of compassion,
she will incline her Son to pardon me."
Difference of R. C.s as to Marian devotions. 4o
tide setting in among you to extreme Marian devo-
tions (I trust that the term is not offensive, since
Bishops speak of Spain at least as "a Marian
kingdom"). The tendency seemed and seems to
me to he, to make matters to he " de fide," which
have heen taught so long undisputed, because they
have been borne with patiently. And yet I was
joyed to find some of your mind among foreign
ecclesiastics. For while a Belgian divine of emi-
nence defended the common saying, "If your Father
[God] is angry with 'you, to whom should you go
but to your Mother [Mary] ?" as the voice of human
nature, another very eminent Theologian condemned
such language with uplifted hands. While one
eminent French Bishop (not one of those, of whom
the French papers reported, that they allowed me
interviews) thought me gravely wrong in not
believing that all graces came through Mary, an
eminent Theologian quoted to me the remarkable
(I fear antiquated) French proverb (to be found,
he told me, in collections of French proverbs), "It
is better to go to God than to all the saints." It
appears to me that you are, on this and other
points, in an unfixed state, analogous to ours;
that God is leading you too somewhere, as all things
among us are manifestly setting in two directions,
and minds are rising to full Catholic belief (I mean,
of course, primitive faith), or sinking to the abyss.
Twenty or thirty years will, I suppose, see these,
the two chief classes in England ; twenty or thirty
44 Vision of the woman clot lied
years will, I suppose, determine whether very much
which is now matter of opinion among you, will be
erected into dogma, or whether there will be a
more pronounced body of Roman Catholics, who
will repress those excesses. Oakeley anticipates
the former as to the Marian system. I trust that
your voice, which once blew a deep trumpet-call
among us, will again occasion others also to speak,
who love truth and soberness. I hope that I see
in your words and your disclaimers a dawn of a
hope of restored union, when yours shall not be a
single voice, and those, who think as you do, shall
by God's help prevail. What we want is to have
it made clear by authority, in some way which God
the Holy Ghost may suggest, that these non-primi-
tive doctrines are not "de fide" or proximate to
faith, and are not to be required of any. It has been
promised to certain individuals, on joining the
Roman communion, that it should not be required
of them to invoke the Blessed Virgin ; one, some
twenty years ago, was allowed to say the Litany of
Jesus instead of the Litany of Loretto. Why should
not what has been allowed to individuals be allowed
to a nation, or rather to many nations (for such the
English are) ? Why should we not, in case of re-
union, be allowed to pray as the Fathers of the
Church and the holy army of martyrs prayed ?
3. The interpretation of Holy Scripture being
very seldom matter of faith, it will create no jar,
that I cannot interpret, as you do, the vision in the
with the sun. " Behold thy mother''1 45
Apocalypse of the woman clothed with the sun.
And this on the ground which, I suppose, deter-
mined the ancient interpreters to explain it of the
Church, that, after the u Child Who was to rule all
nations with a rod of iron, was caught up unto
God and to His throne," " the woman fled into the
wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of
God." The impossibility of explaining this as to
the Blessed Virgin has determined a modern Roman
Catholic interpreter too to adhere to the ancient
interpretation as the literal sense, and hold the
application to the Blessed Virgin to be nothing
more than allusive. But doctrine is only derived
from the literal sense. Here, however, nothing is
at issue, since the B. V. was undoubtedly more than
arrayed in the sun, when " the Sun of righteous-
ness" dwelt in her.
4. The interpretation of the passage, upon which
Roman Catholics now generally rest the title of the
Blessed Virgin, " our mother," is, of course, much
graver. For this introduces a new personal relation
of the Blessed Virgin to us, not indirectly through
our Lord, but directly as given to her by Him. It
is a great change. In the two ancient passages,
where alone, as I believe, she is spoken of as hypo-
thetically the mother of any Christian, or mother
of Christians, it is because we are "members of
Christ3." Our relation to Christ is immediate;
3 The two passages of which I know, are, the one of Origen,
the other S. Augustine's. Origen (in Joann. i. 6. p. 6. ed, de la
46 Language of Origen and St. Augustine
she is the Mother of Him our Head, of Whom we
have been made the members. She has not, in
Eue) is speaking of the greatness of St. John's Gospel, and
that no one could understand it, who was not himself another
St. John, and by the indwelling of Christ, a " Jesus from Jesus."
Having spoken of the other Evangelists as having reserved
something for St. John, he says, " We must venture to say,
that the Gospels are the first-fruits of all Scriptures, and that
that according to John is the first-fruits of the Gospels, whose
mind no one can gain, unless he lie upon the breast of Jesus,
and receives from Jesus, Mary becoming his mother also. Such
must one become who would be another John, so that like
John he might be shown to be a Jesus from Jesus. For if
there was, according to those who think soundly in regard to
her, no other son of Mary but Jesus, and Jesus says to His
mother, ' Behold thy son,' and not, ' Behold this too is thy son,'
He says as much as, ' This is Jesus whom, thou barest.' For
every one who is perfected, it is no longer he who liveth, but
Christ liveth in him, and since Christ liveth in him, He saith
of him to Mary, ' See thy son, Christ.' " It is plain that Origen' s
thought was that, to understand St. John, one must be another
St. John ; that those who had the mind of Christ, and were
indwelt by Him, were, as some fathers boldly say, " Christs"
(Xpio-roi), and were the sons of Mary, because members of
Him Who was the Son of Mary. S. Augustine's meaning is
plainly the same. He is consoling those who had given them-
selves to the virgin life, that they could not be also mothers,
and says that virgins too are spiritually mothers of Christ.
" That birth from the one holy Virgin is the glory of all holy
virgins. They too, with Mary, are mothers of Christ, if they
do the will of His Father. For hence was Mary too, in a
more praiseworthy and blessed way, Mother of Christ, accord-
ing to this saying above-mentioned, 'Whosoever doeth the
will of My Father Which is in heaven, the same is My brother
and sister and mother.' All these kinships He forms for
Himself spiritually in the people which He lias redeemed ; for
brothers and sisters He hath holy men and holy women, since
bearing on our Lortfs words. 47
this aspect, been assigned to men as a Mother to
bring them to Christ by her intercessions ; her only
they are co-heirs with Him in the heavenly inheritance. His
mother is the whole Church, because she bears His members,
that is, His faithful through the grace of God. Also every
pious soul is His mother, doing the will of His Father in most
prolific charity, in those of whom it travaileth until He be
formed in them. Mary, then, doing the will of God, is cor-
porally only mother of Christ, but spiritually both sister and
mother ; and thereby that one woman is not only in spirit, but
also in body, both mother and virgin. And, indeed, mother in
spirit, not of our Head, of Whom rather she was spiritually
born, because all those who believed in Him, of whom she too
^as one, are rightly called children of the Bridegroom ; but
mother of His members, which we are, because she co-operated
by love that faithful should be born in the Church, who are
members of that Head, but, in the body, the Mother of the
Head Himself. For need was, that our Head, on account of
the wondrous miracle, should according to the flesh be born
of a virgin, that He might signify that, according to the spirit,
His members should be born of the Virgin Church. Mary
then alone is, in spirit and body, mother and virgin, and mother
of Christ and virgin of Christ. But the Church, which in the
saints shall possess the kingdom of God, is, in spirit, the whole
of her, mother of Christ ; the whole of her, virgin of Christ ;
but in the body, not the whole of her, but in some [members]
virgin of Christ, in others, mothers, but not of Christ" [viz. of
children who "are not born Christians of their flesh, but
become such"], [de sancta virginit. c. 5, 6]. It is plain, from
S. Augustine's speaking in past time, " she co-operated," that
he is speaking of the act of the Blessed Virgin in the Incarna-
tion, by which she, through engraced love, became corporally
Mother of Him, of whom we, by grace and spiritually, are
members. Directly, he speaks of the Church as our Mother ;
ultimately, she, whose virgin birth typified, he said, the virgin
maternity of the Church, is our mother, because mother of Him,
in Whom by grace we are.
48 " Behold thy mother" interpreted ofS. John only
relation to us is, in that we are already Christ's.
It is remarkable, moreover, that no one of the
early expositors of Scripture, as Origen, S. Chry-
sostom, S. Augustine, S. Cyril of Alexandria, (even
such of them as explain our Lord's words to St.
John and to His mother in the way of homilies,)
or of those who comment on our Lord's words,
although not on the Gospel, S. Hilary 4, S. Am-
brose5, or S. Siricius6 (or Damasus); or Ter-
tullian 7, who alludes to them, interprets the
words, " Behold thy Son," " Behold thy Mother,"
of any relation of the Blessed Virgin, except
that personal relation which is literally contained
in the words, between the beloved disciple and
herself. And this is the more remarkable in S.
Ambrose, because he does in one place give a mys-
tical interpretation of the words ; yet it relates to
the Church, not to the Blessed Virgin 8. Some of
these passages are but allusions ; yet no one, I think,
4 In S. Matt. c. i. pp. 611, 612.
5 In S. Luc. ii. 4. vii. 5. x. 131. De instit. virg. vii. 47. Ep.
63. Eccl. Verc. n. i. 109. De obifc. Valent. n. 39.
6 Epist. ad Anys. et Epp. Illyr. Concil. T. ii. p. 1230. ed. Col.
7 de Prsescr. c. 22.
8 " Thou sayest, How can I be a son of thunder ? Thou canst,
if thou recline, not on the earth, but on the breast of Christ.
Thou canst be a son of thunder, if earthly things move thee not,
but thou rather, by the power of thy mind, shatter the things of
earth. Let the earth stand in awe of thee, not capture thee ;
let the flesh feel the power of thy mind, be shaken and subdued.
Thou wilt be a son of thunder, if thou art a son of the Church.
Let Christ say to thee from the Cross of suffering, ' Behold thy
by the Fathers ; improbable texts alleged later. 49
can be otherwise than morally convinced that a
modern Roman writer would have introduced the
doctrine; nor can I myself think otherwise than
that they did not introduce it because they were
unacquainted with the doctrine, that they did not
look upon St. John as a type of Christians, or think
of any thing beyond the bare literal meaning. And
yet S. Cyril, as you have observed, gave her the
most exalted titles.
Yet those titles point to and culminate in our
Lord; they are not reflected back, so as to have any
relation directly to us. She was the Mother of
Him Who is all in all to us; she has no personal
office to us. So here. Her holy Motherhood ter-
minates in Him : our relation is to Him Whom she
bare, God-Man, our Redeemer, not to herself. And,
although Roman Catholics now rest the relation
chiefly on our Lord's words to St. John, and any
other explanation of those words seems to them un-
natural, not only is this interpretation not, I believe,
found in antiquity, but in later times too the relation
was rested equally on other mystical interpretations,
in which few would probably now find it. Thus, on
the same mis-interpretation which the Socinians,
&c., adopt, that the words "she conceived her first-
born son," not only declared our Lord's relation to
her, but implied that she had other sons, it was
mother.' Let Him say to the Church, too, ' Behold thy son ;'
for then thou beginnest to be a son of the Church, when thoti
beholdest Christ conquer upon the cross." In S. Luc. vii. 5.
D 4—
50 S. Athanasius calls the B. V. our sister.
argued that, since piety forbade to think that she
had other sons after the flesh, it must mean that
she had spiritual sons 9. Another, somehow, derived
the doctrine from the words, " I am the Mother of
fair love ] ;'' or from those in the Psalm, " Save the
son of Thy handmaid 2," as if David thereby called
himself the son of Mary. On the other hand, I
cannot think that, with any belief like that ex-
pressed by the name now, S. Athanasius could have
called Mary " our sister." " 3 Nay, no phantasy is
our salvation, nor of the body only ; but of the whole
man, soul and body in truth, was our salvation
wrought in the Word Himself. Human, then, by
nature, was That which was from Mary, according to
the Sacred Scriptures, and true was the Body of the
Lord. True it was, since it was the same with
ours. For Mary was our sister, seeing also that we
are all from Adam." I cannot but think that some
other term or form of expression would have been
used.
5. Your statement4 about the doctrine of the Im-
maculate Conception opens a gleam of hope where
the clouds seemed thickest before. It shews that
the form of the doctrine, which brings it most proxi-
mately in connexion with that of the transmission
9 Anonymous author in S. Lig. Glor. of M. i. pp. 94, 95 ;
also S. Gertrude, as a " revelation." Ib.
1 Ecclus. xxiv. 14. Ib. p. 98. 2 Ps. Ixxxv. 16.
8 Ep. ad Epict. n. 7. Opp. i. 906. Ben.
* Letter, p. 52.
Active and passive Conception. 51
of original sin, is not declared to be de fide. Your
rejection of any such belief as, that the Blessed
Virgin did not die in Adam, that she did not come
under the penalty of the fall, that she was con-
ceived in some way inconsistent with the verse in
the Miserere Psalm 5, if confirmed by authority,
would remove difficulties as to doctrine, which
the decree suggested to the Greeks as well as to
ourselves. Indeed, subsequently to the publication
of the Eirenicon, Mgr. Dupanloup had the good-
ness to explain to me his own belief, which is the
same as yours, and in explanation of which he quotes
the statement of Benedict XIV. ; —
" 6 Conception may be taken in two ways : for it is either
active, wherein the parents of the B. V., coming together, sup-
plied what related to the formation, organisation, and disposi-
tion of her body for receiving the rational soul, to be infused
therein by Grod, or it is passive, when the rational soul is united
with the body. For this infusion and union with the body is
commonly called the passive Conception, which itself takes place
at that very instant in which the rational soul is united with
the body, consisting of all its members and its organs V
6 Ps. li. 5.
6 de festiv. D. N. J. C., B. M. V., et quorund. Sanctt. c. xv.
7 I gave this same explanation in the Eirenicon, p. 146. A
critic (who reads awry all which I write) imputes my so doing
to my " own very imperfect acquaintance with the common
terms and distinctions of divines upon matters upon which I
undertake to write" (Month, Dec. 1865, p. 630). The same
critic, in the same page, imputes to me a grotesque ignorance
of the meaning of the words, " I believe one Catholic and
Apostolic Church," because I said, that in the words which
confess to God her being, I confessed also my belief in her
authority and my implicit submission to her teaching.
D 2 --K
52 Mgr. Dupanloup* Imm. Cone, differs in degree
His own explanation is,
" 8 The Imm. Cone., in the mother of the Saviour, is the ex-
emption from the original stain at the moment when the soul
•was created and united with her body, i.e. the dispensation, by
Divine favour, for that blessed soul, of that mysterious solidarity,
whereby we all come into existence, deprived of sanctifying
grace, righteousness, primeval purity, and deprived of the
friendship of God. We say that it was not thus with Mary.
At the moment that her beautiful soul was united to the body,
prepared naturally in her mother's womb to receive it, this soul,
by the bounty of God, was supernaturally, even then, wholly
pure, adorned with sanctifying grace, embellished (as the first
man was formerly in the state of innocence, and even in a de-
gree more excellent) with the interior gifts of righteousness
and original holiness, exempt from all germ of concupiscence, as
of the sin itself which is its source, and finally as the well-
beloved daughter of Heaven, wherewith she was one day to be
united by relations so amazing and so close."
The gift of sanctifying grace, at the first moment
of existence, would be different in degree only, not
in kind1, from what Holy Scripture states in regard
to Jeremiah, and St. John the Baptist. The sanc-
tification of Jeremiah was in his mother's womb 2.
Of St. John Baptist the angel seems to pro-
phesy that he should be sanctified, " then and
thenceforward V The sanctification, attributed to
the Blessed Virgin under the term " Immaculate
8 Mandement, 1855, p. 3.
1 This is not my statement only, but that of Mgr. Dupan-
loup.
2 Jer. i. 5.
8 St. Luke i. 15. Meyer (as cited by Alford on St. Luke)
thinks that the sanctification in his mother's womb lies in the
words en e/c /coiXtas /A. a.
only from that of Jeremiah and S. John B. 53
Conception," would, on this explanation, be only
anterior in time ; for, since Jeremiah and St. John
Baptist came into the world already sanctified,
they too were born free from the stain of original
sin.
Thus far there was no difficulty. It was natural
to believe that what Holy Scripture relates to
have been granted to Jeremiah and St. John Bap-
tist was (even though not related) granted to her
whom our Lord willed to bring into so near a rela-
tion to Himself. The difficulty, as you know, arose
as to the doctrine of the transmission of original
sin, and related both to the (so-called) "active"
and "passive" "conception." S. Bernard states
both, while himself maintaining the sanctification
in her mother's womb.
" * She could not be holy before she was ; since, before she
was conceived, she was not. Or did perchance holiness mingle
itself with the conception itself, so that she should be at once
sanctified and conceived ? Neither will reason admit this.
For how could there be holiness without the hallowing Spirit ?
or was the Holy Spirit associated with sin ? or how was there
not sin, where concupiscence was not absent ? unless some one
said, that she was conceived of the Holy Ghost and not of man ;
but this hath hitherto been unheard of. It remains, that she be
believed to have received sanctification while already existing
4 Ep. 174 ad Canon. Lugd. A story was circulated as to
S. Bernard, " that he retracted that opinion, at least after his
death ; whence it is said that he appeared to a certain monk
after death with a spot on his breast, on account of the things
which he had said as to the Conception of the glorious Virgin."
Capreolus in Sent, 3. 3 q. 1. art. 1, fin.
54 S. Bernard held Nativ.ofB. V. holy, not her Cone.
in the womb, which, excluding sin, made her nativity holy, but
not her conception also. "Wherefore, although to some, though
few, of the human race, it has been granted to be born with
holiness, yet to be conceived so too has not been granted, in
order that the prerogative of a holy Conception might be re-
served for One "Who should sanctify all, and, coming Alone with-
out sin, should purge away sins. The Lord Jesus, then, Alone
was conceived by the Holy G-host, because He Alone was Holy,
even before His Conception. Him excepted, that regards ail
who are born of Adam, which one humbly and truly said of
himself, ' I was conceived in wickedness, and in sin did my
mother conceive me. ' "
S. Bernard does not further express, in what way
the defect, entailed upon the hody through concu-
piscence, involved the soul.
Prohably no explanation can be satisfactory.
Mohler states the difficulties of each in turn, and
says, on the authority of Payva ah Andrada, a
Portuguese theologian present at the Council of
Trent, that it purposely abstained from defining
wherein original sin consisted5, acting, Pallavicini
adds, on the advice of the legates, " not to decide
upon the nature of original sin, since divines were of
different opinions thereon, Scripture and Tradition
giving no results/'
The Schoolmen indeed mostly seem to lay down,
that there could have been no sanctification before
animation, and, as they state it, it is self-evident.
Thus Biel says G :
" The first conclusion, in which all agree, (is.) The Virgin
Symbolik, i. 2. p. 57. 6 3. 3 q. 1. art. 1.
Schoolmen deny sanctification before animation. 55
Mary, before the second conception, whereby she was animated
in her mother's womb, was not sanctified by grace. This is
obvious, because that sanctification takes place through the
infusion of grace, of which the intellectual soul alone is capable;
therefore, where it existed not, sanctifying grace could not be ;
but, before the second conception, the soul was not, since it is
created by infusing ; therefore, &c. Also, to be sanctified pre-
supposes being ; whence what is not is not sanctified; but, before
the second conception or animating of the Virgin, the Virgin
was not ; therefore she was not sanctified."
For, of course, as soon as it is laid down that
sanctification is to be taken in the sense of " the
infusion of grace," it is self-evident that such sanc-
tification can take place only in the soul. We are
here on grounds purely abstract. And, supposing
(as the Schoolmen thought) that the body does ever
exist without the soul, I see no reason why it
should not have been sanctified then. For since
the body, which has once been the temple of the
Holy Ghost, even when resolved into its dust, is, in
its dust, still holy, (as the common reverence of
Christians thinks, not of Elisha's bones only, when
the dead man woke to life at their touch, nor of the
true remains of martyrs only, but, in their degree,
as to the dust of those really asleep in Christ,) so
I do not see any ground in the nature of things,
why it should not have been sanctified before it
received the soul. Durandus a S. Porciano, on the
theory that "7 by Adam's fall a destructive infectious
quality worked its way into the human body, and,
7 Mohler, 1. c.
56 Soul ofB. V. could be sanctified, when infused.
being propagated by generation, encompassed the
soul at the moment of its union with the body,
drew it down to itself, and communicated to it its
own disorder," held it possible that the B. V. should
" not have been conceived in original sin, but that
at one and the same time she received her soul and
grace was given her."
"3 Although original sin \sformaliter only in the soul,
yet in the flesh there is a certain diseased quality or infection,
by reason whereof original sin is contracted from the conjunc-
tion of the soul with the flesh having this diseased quality.
Since then that diseased quality is different from the flesh
itself, a given mass of flesh might be preserved by Divine
power from being infected, or, if infected, might be cleansed
before the infusion of the soul, so that, although on the part
of the generator it was in itself flesh unclean and diseased, yet,
by Divine virtue cleansing, it was made immaculate and clean,
so that, from the union of the soul therewith, original sin should
not be contracted by the soul.'*
The question of the immaculateness of the " active
conception" was, of course, different from this. It
was allowed that the act in itself might be pleasing
to God, when done purely to fulfil the will of God,
as in the case of Abraham. But they distinguished
between " the act of the person, in which the will
was the moving cause, and the act of nature, in
which nature was the moving cause ; in regard to
the will, the act proceeded from charity; in regard
to nature, from the disorderedness of concupiscence.
But conception followed from nature, not from the
8 In sent, 3. 3 q. 1.
Active Conception taught ty some to be Imm. 57
will;" and therefore, following S. Bernard, they
held that, " although on one side the act might be
meritorious, the conception itself, following thereon,
would not be, and so neither was there sanctifica-
tion in conception V
Yet, although this might be the thoughtful
opinion, yet the popular mind would not enter into
these distinctions. It was natural to understand
by the " Immaculate Conception" conception in its
widest sense. It seemed pious, too, to think that,
when the will was holy, all which followed on that
will was holy too. And, accordingly, in the " Reve-
lations of S. Brigit," the exemption of the B. V. from
original sin was connected with the propriety of the
marital union of her parents. The Blessed Virgin
is introduced as saying } : t
" It is the truth, that I was conceived without original sin,
because as my Son and I never sinned, so no marriage was ever
more proper [nullum conjugium honestius] than that from
which I proceeded.'*
Such conception of her body is also spoken of as
the ground of the Festival of the Immaculate Con-
ception 2 ;
" Wherefore also it would be very fitting and worthy, that
that day should be held by all in great reverence, on which that
matter was conceived and collected in the womb of Anna, from
9 Trom Alex. Ales, P. 3. q. 9. memb. 2. art. 2.
1 Eevel. S. Brigit. vi. c. 49.
3 Sermo Angel. B. Brigitta?, fin, p, G61.
58 Some taught Immaculateness of active Cone. ;
which the blessed body of the Mother of God was to be formed,
which ["matter," "quam,"] God Himself and all His Angels
loved exceedingly in so great charity."
The Feast of the Nativity being Sept. 8, the day
of the Feast of the Immaculate Conception, Dec. 8,
was that day of which S. Brigit speaks.
In the first prayer, said to have been " 3 revealed
by God to the Bl. Brigit," in which " the glorious
Virgin is devoutly and beautifully praised for her
sacred Conception, &c." the conception spoken of
is, not the infusion of the soul but, the conception
of the body through her parents.
" 4 Glory be to thee, my Lady, Virgin Mary, Mother of God,
who, by that same Angel by whom Christ was announced to
thee, wert announced to thy father and mother, and wert con-
ceived and born of their most honourable marriage."
Of course, no believer would deny, on abstract
grounds, that God could miraculously have made
the "active conception" also absolutely holy, had
He so willed. We only want the evidence, that He
has revealed that He did so. But, unless some
authoritative explanation is given by the Roman
Church, it seems to me inevitable that under the
term " Immaculate Conception," which is declared
to be " of faith," the conception of the body of the
3 Ib. p. 674.
4 Ib. p. 764. A like stress on the propriety [honestas] of
the marriage is laid in the Sermo Angel, c. 10. Ib. p. 661 ;
the absence of concupiscence is dwelt upon in Revel, i. 9. Ib.
p. 13. At the close of Eev. L. v. God the Father is introduced,
saying, " She was conceived without sin, that My Son might be
conceived of her without sin." p. 409.
this commonly meant by word c conception.' 50
Blessed Virgin will be included. Some Bishops,
who were consulted about making " the Immaculate
Conception" an article of faith, understood by the
term " the conception of the body." Thus Alex-
ander, Abp. of Urbino, said5,
" Nay, although almost all theologians, distributing Concep-
tion into active and passive, contend that the passive only, and
not the active, was immaculate in the B. V. yet, in the sense of
the Church, I should believe either that this distinction was not
really present, or that the active also was held to be immaculate.
For this seemeth to be opposed neither to reason nor Scripture,
and is supported also with some appearance of truth out of the
revelations of S. Brigit, from which the Conception of the B. V.
is inferred to have been therefore immaculate, because there
was no marriage more decorous than that from which she
proceeded."
This is, moreover, what, in common language, is
meant by " conception," not in our own only but in
other tongues. This is impressed upon our people
by the language of Holy Scripture, in which the
word u conceived" is uniformly used of what took
place in the mother, as the result of the coming
together of the parents 6. The most probable ori-
ginal meaning of the Hebrew word, used in Holy
5 Pareri, &c., iii. 43. Among the Schoolmen I see that
Capreolus says, " There is a twofold inquiry as to this question
[of the Immaculate Conception], because she had two sanc-
tifications. The first inquiry is about the sanctification of the
B. V. in the womb, while she was being conceived passively.
The second, of the sanctification, while she was being conceived
actively, of which sanctification I much doubt." In Sent. 3. 3,
q. 1. art. 1. fin.
• e. g. Gen, iv. 1. 17. xvi. 4, &c.
60 Unexplained, the Imm. Cone, will probably
Scripture, points to an act in which there was some,
even if involuntary, human passion 7. Holy Scrip-
ture speaks of conception without the distinctions
of the schools. The distinction also which used to
be made, whereby the reception of the rudiments
of the body was separated by some long interval
from the infusion of the soul, is now abandoned.
It was part of the Aristotelian physics, when " the
quickening," i. e. the moment when the child had
strength to move in its mother's womb, was thought
to be the real commencement of the animate exist-
ence of the human being, i. e. of the infusion of the
soul 8. This date of what was called " the passive
conception" having been tacitly abandoned, it is
probable that the distinction of time will be aban-
doned too. There is, of course, a distinction, as
wide as heaven and earth. For the conception of
the human body is through that which each parent
supplieth ; the infusion of the soul is from God. But
the ground for detaching the two acts in time being
gone, the wide distinction which used to be made
formerly is gone too. Scripture says nothing;
and, amid its silence, reason says nothing, physics
nothing. There is an impenetrable veil over the
7 The word mil stands alone in the Semitic dialects. The
only probable etymology which I have seen is that of Gesenius,
that it is a softer pronunciation of mil, " incalesco," accord-
ing to the analogy of DIT, the word used in Ps. li. 7.
8 The theory, I am told, still remains in our laws, in which
the destruction of the foetus before a given time is not ac-
counted the destruction of a living beiug.
only from that of Jeremiah and S. John B. 53
Conception," would, on this explanation, be only
anterior in time ; for, since Jeremiah and St. John
Baptist came into the world already sanctified,
they too were born free from the stain of original
sin.
Thus far there was no difficulty. It was natural
to believe that what Holy Scripture relates to
have been granted to Jeremiah and St. John Bap-
tist was (even though not related) granted to her
whom our Lord willed to bring into so near a rela-
tion to Himself. The difficulty, as you know, arose
as to the doctrine of the transmission of original
sin, and related both to the (so-called) "active"
and "passive" "conception." S. Bernard states
both, while himself maintaining the sanctification
in her mother's womb.
" 4 She could not be holy before she was ; since, before she
was conceived, she was not. Or did perchance holiness mingle
itself with the conception itself, so that she should be at once
sanctified and conceived ? Neither will reason admit this.
For how could there be holiness without the hallowing Spirit ?
or was the Holy Spirit associated with sin ? or how was there
not sin, where concupiscence was not absent ? unless some one
said, that she was conceived of the Holy Ghost and not of man ;
but this hath hitherto been unheard of. It remains, that she be
believed to have received sanctification while already existing
4 Ep. 174 ad Canon. Lugd. A story was circulated as to
S. Bernard, " that he retracted that opinion, at least after his
death ; whence it is said that he appeared to a certain monk
after death with a spot on his breast, on account of the things
which he had said as to the Conception of the glorious Virgin."
Capreolus in Sent. 3. 3 q. 1. art. 1, fiu.
54 S. Bernard held Natw.ofB. V. holy, not her Cone.
in the womb, which, excluding sin, made her nativity holy, but
not her conception also. Wherefore, although to some, though
few, of the human race, it has been granted to be born with
holiness, yet to be conceived so too has not been granted, in
order that the prerogative of a holy Conception might be re-
served for One Who should sanctify all, and, comiug Alone with-
out sin, should purge away sins. The Lord Jesus, then, Alone
was conceived by the Holy Ghost, because He Alone was Holy,
even before His Conception. Him excepted, that regards all
who are born of Adam, which one humbly and truly said of
himself, 'I was conceived in wickedness, and in sin did my
mother conceive me. ' '
S. Bernard does not further express, in what way
the defect, entailed upon the body through concu-
piscence, involved the soul.
Probably no explanation can be satisfactory.
Mohler states the difficulties of each in turn, and
says, on the authority of Payva ab Andrada, a
Portuguese theologian present at the Council of
Trent, that it purposely abstained from defining
wherein original sin consisted5, acting, Pallavicini
adds, on the advice of the legates, " not to decide
upon the nature of original sin, since divines were of
different opinions thereon, Scripture and Tradition
giving no results."
The Schoolmen indeed mostly seem to lay down,
that there could have been no sanctification before
animation, and, as they state it, it is self-evident.
Thus Biel says G :
" The first conclusion, in which all agree, (is,) The Virgin
Symbolik, i. 2. p. 57. e 3. 3 q. 1. art. 1.
Schoolmen deny sanctification before animation. 55
Mary, before the second conception, "whereby she was animated
in her mother's womb, was not sanctified by grace. This is
obvious, because that sanctification takes place through the
infusion of grace, of which the intellectual soul alone is capable;
therefore, where it existed not, sanctifying grace could not be ;
but, before the second conception, the soul was not, since it is
created by infusing; therefore, &c. Also, to be sanctified pre-
supposes being ; whence what is not is not sanctified; but, before
the second conception or animating of the Virgin, the Virgin
was not ; therefore she was not sanctified."
For, of course, as soon as it is laid down that
sanctification is to be taken in the sense of " the
infusion of grace," it is self-evident that such sanc-
tification can take place only in the soul. We are
here on grounds purely abstract. And, supposing
(as the Schoolmen thought) that the body does ever
exist without the soul, I see no reason why it
should not have been sanctified then. For since
the body, which has once been the temple of the
Holy Ghost, even when resolved into its dust, is, in
its dust, still holy, (as the common reverence of
Christians thinks, not of Elisha's bones only, when
the dead man woke to life at their touch, nor of the
true remains of martyrs only, but, in their degree,
as to the dust of those really asleep in Christ,) so
I do not see any ground in the nature of things,
why it should not have been sanctified before it
received the soul. Durandus a S. Porciano, on the
theory that "7 by Adam's fall a destructive infectious
quality worked its way into the human body, and,
7 Mohler, 1. c.
56 Soul of B. V. could be sanctified, when infused.
being propagated by generation, encompassed the
soul at tbe moment of its union with the body,
drew it down to itself, and communicated to it its
own disorder," held it possible that the B. Y. should
" not have been conceived in original sin, but that
at one and the same time she received her soul and
grace was given her."
" 3 Although original sin isformaliter only in the soul,
yet in the flesh there is a certain diseased quality or infection,
by reason whereof original sin is contracted from the conjunc-
tion of the soul with the flesh having this diseased quality.
Since then that diseased quality is different from the flesh
itself, a given mass of flesh might be preserved by Divine
power from being infected, or, if infected, might be cleansed
before the infusion of the soul, so that, although on the part
of the generator it was in itself flesh unclean and diseased, yet,
by Divine virtue cleansing, it was made immaculate and clean,
so that, from the union of the soul therewith, original sin should
not be contracted by the soul."
The question of the immaculateness of the " active
conception" was, of course, different from this. It
was allowed that the act in itself might be pleasing
to God, when done purely to fulfil the will of God,
as in the case of Abraham. But they distinguished
between " the act of the person, in which the will
was the moving cause, and the act of nature, in
which nature was the moving cause ; in regard to
the will, the act proceeded from charity ; in regard
to nature, from the disorderedness of concupiscence.
But conception followed from nature, not from the
8 In sent, 3, 3 q. 1,
Active Conception taught by some to be Imm. 57
will;" and therefore, following S. Bernard, they
held that, " although on one side the act might be
meritorious, the conception itself, following thereon,
would not be, and so neither was there sanctifica-
tion in conception 9."
Yet, although this might be the thoughtful
opinion, yet the popular mind would not enter into
these distinctions. It was natural to understand
by the " Immaculate Conception" conception in its
widest sense. It seemed pious, too, to think that,
when the will was holy, all which followed on that
will was holy too. And, accordingly, in the " Reve-
lations of S. Brigit," the exemption of the B. V. from
original sin was connected with the propriety of the
marital union of her parents. The Blessed Virgin
is introduced as saying l :
" It is the truth, that I was conceived without original sin,
because as my Son and I never sinned, so no marriage was ever
more proper [nullum conjugium honestius] than that from
which I proceeded."
Such conception of her body is also spoken of as
the ground of the Festival of the Immaculate Con-
ception2;
" "Wherefore also it would be very fitting and worthy, that
that day should be held by all in great reverence, on which that
matter was conceived and collected in the womb of Anna, from
9 From Alex. Ales, P. 3. q. 9. memb. 2. art. 2.
1 Eevel. S. Brigit. vi. c. 49.
3 Sermo Angel. B, Brigittje, fin. p. 661,
58 Some taught Immaculateness of active Cone. ;
which the blessed body of the Mother of God was to be formed,
which ["matter," "quam,"] God Himself and all His Angela
loved exceedingly in so great charity."
The Feast of the Nativity being Sept. 8, the day
of the Feast of the Immaculate Conception, Dec. 8,
was that day of which S. Brigit speaks.
In the first prayer, said to have been " 3 revealed
by God to the Bl. Brigit," in which " the glorious
Virgin is devoutly and beautifully praised for her
sacred Conception, &c." the conception spoken of
is, not the infusion of the soul but, the conception
of the body through her parents.
"4 Glory be to thee, my Lady, Virgin Mary, Mother of God,
who, by that same Angel by whom Christ was announced to
thee, wert announced to thy father and mother, and wert con-
ceived and born of their most honourable marriage."
Of course, no believer would deny, on abstract
grounds, that God could miraculously have made
the "active conception" also absolutely holy, had
He so willed. We only want the evidence, that He
has revealed that He did so. But, unless some
authoritative explanation is given by the Roman
Church, it seems to me inevitable that under the
term " Immaculate Conception," which is declared
to be " of faith," the conception of the body of the
3 Ib. p. 674.
4 Ib. p. 764. A like stress on the propriety [honestas] of
the marriage is laid in the Sermo Angel, c. 10. Ib. p. 661 ;
the absence of concupiscence is dwelt upon in Eevel. i. 9. Ib.
p. 13. At the close of Eev. L. v. God the Father is introduced,
saying, " She was conceived without sin, that My Son might be
conceived of her without sin." p. 409.
this commonly meant by word ''conception.' 59
Blessed Virgin will be included. Some Bishops,
who were consulted about making " the Immaculate
Conception" an article of faith, understood by the
term "the conception of the body." Thus Alex-
ander, Abp. of Urbino, said5,
"Nay, although almost all theologians, distributing Concep-
tion into active and passive, contend that the passive only, and
not the active, was immaculate in the B. V. yet, in the sense of
the Church, I should believe either that this distinction was not
really present, or that the active also was held to be immaculate.
For this seemeth to be opposed neither to reason nor Scripture,
and is supported also with some appearance of truth out of the
revelations of S. Brigifc, from which the Conception of the B. V.
is inferred to have been therefore immaculate, because there
was no marriage more decorous than that from which she
proceeded."
This is, moreover, what, in common language, is
meant by " conception," not in our own only but in
other tongues. This is impressed upon our people
by the language of Holy Scripture, in which the
word u conceived" is uniformly used of what took
place in the mother, as the result of the coming
together of the parents 6. The most probable ori-
ginal meaning of the Hebrew word, used in Holy
6 Pared, &c., iii. 43. Among the Schoolmen I see that
Capreolus says, " There is a twofold inquiry as to this question
[of the Immaculate Conception], because she had two sanc-
tifications. The first inquiry is about the sanctification of the
B. V. in the womb, while she was being conceived passively.
The second, of the sanctification, while she was being conceived
actively, of which sanctification I much doubt." In Sent, 3. 3,
q. 1. art. 1. fin.
0 e. g. Gen, iv. 1. 17. xvi, 4, &c.
60 Unexplained, the Imm. Cone, will probably
Scripture, points to an act in which there was some,
even if involuntary, human passion 7. Holy Scrip-
ture speaks of conception without the distinctions
of the schools. The distinction also which used to
be made, whereby the reception of the rudiments
of the body was separated by some long interval
from the infusion of the soul, is now abandoned.
It was part of the Aristotelian physics, when " the
quickening," i. e. the moment when the child had
strength to move in its mother's womb, was thought
to be the real commencement of the animate exist-
ence of the human being, i. e. of the infusion of the
soul 8. This date of what was called " the passive
conception" having been tacitly abandoned, it is
probable that the distinction of time will be aban-
doned too. There is, of course, a distinction, as
wide as heaven and earth. For the conception of
the human body is through that which each parent
supplieth ; the infusion of the soul is from God. But
the ground for detaching the two acts in time being
gone, the wide distinction which used to be made
formerly is gone too. Scripture says nothing;
and, amid its silence, reason says nothing, physics
nothing. There is an impenetrable veil over the
7 The word ITUl stands alone in the Semitic dialects. The
only probable etymology which I have seen is that of Gesenius,
that it is a softer pronunciation of rnn, " incalesco," accord-
ing to the analogy of DPP, the word used in Ps. li. 7.
8 The theory, I am told, still remains in our laws, in which
the destruction of the foetus before a given time is not ac-
counted the destruction of a living being.
include the conception of the body too. 61
commencement of the undying life of the soul.
The two acts may as probably be simultaneous as
not. And when Holy Scripture says, " in sin did
my mother conceive me," it speaks not only of the
formless embryo, but of the whole being, " me."
When, on the other hand, Schoolmen wished to
express the reception of the soul as distinct from
the conception of the body, some of them, at least,
used separate terms, and spoke of the reception of
the soul as being " the second conception," or " the
animation 9," which the Scotists declared to be im-
9 Alexander de Hales, following S. Bernard, puts the same
questions as he, whether the B. V. was sanctified before her con-
ception, i. e. in her parents ; whether she could be sanctified
in the conception itself; whether, also, after the conception,
before the infusion of the soul, P. 3. q. 9. memb. 2. Art. 1, 2, 3.
S. Thomas proceeds in the same order, denying that she could
be sanctified before her conception, until after her conception,
or before her animation : but holding (like de Hales) that she
was sanctified before her birth (in 3 dist. 3. q. 1. art. 2). S.
Bonaventura follows S. Bernard, that the flesh of the Blessed
Virgin could not be sanctified before or in her conception, or
before animation ; and holds "that it was more consonant to the
piety of faith and the authority of the saints, that her sanctifi-
cation was after the contraction of original sin." L. 3. dist. 3.
art. 1. Albertus Magnus asks the same questions, " Whether
the flesh of the B. V. was sanctified in the womb or before the
womb ?" " Whether her flesh was sanctified before animation
or after it ? " He himself held that to say that she was sanc-
tified before animation was a heresy condemned by S. Bernard
and all the masters of Paris (in 3. Dist. 3. Art. 3, 4). Diony-
sius Carth. quotes Udalrie, (a celebrated disciple of Albert. M.,)
as saying (Summa L. v.), " We believe that the mother of Christ,
most worthy of all praise, was sanctified speedily after her
animation, i. e. the infusion of her soul. But John was sanctified
62 Unexplained, the Imm. Cone, will probably
maculate in the Blessed Virgin. It seems then the
more probable to me, that when this their limita-
tion is dropped, the term "conception" must be
understood, in this case, of what every one under-
stands it of in every other. And that the more,
since the day, upon which the Immaculate Concep-
tion is celebrated, is that accounted to be the day
of the first Conception. The term, also, used in
the Bull \ still seems to me, unexplained, to favour
the same impression. For S. Thomas Aquinas,
in one of the passages which I quoted 2, uses it
unmistakeably of the conception of the body. For
although our Blessed Lord, when He vouchsafed to
take our nature upon Him, took both body and
soul together, yet S. Thomas, in asking the ques-
tion which he purposed to answer by affirming this
sooner than Jeremiah, yet later than Mary, in that he was
sanctified in the 6th month after his conception, when his
mother was visited by the mother of Christ. But that some
celebrate the conception of the B. V., this is borne with by the
Church, not referring it to the conception of seeds but of natures,
which was in the infusion of the soul ; nor do they celebrate it
[the conception of the B. V.] because it was in sin, but by
reason of the sanctification, nearly adjoined to it." (Dion, in
Sent. 3. 3. q. 1. p. 38.)
1 " In primo instanti conceptionis suse." Alexander VII. in
the Constit., Solicitudo omnium Ecclesiarum, used the more
restricted expression, "animain in primo iustanti creationis
atque infusionis in corpus," quoted by Perrone, de Immac.
B. M. V. Cone. p. 48. The Scholia on Scotus (p. 31) use the
term "in primo instanti animatiottis ;" Biel, " in instanti sua?
animationis" and "ante conceptionem secundam, qua fuit ill
utero matris sua3 animata," in 3 dist. 3. q. I.
2 Eirenicon, p. 147.
include the conception of the body too. 63
truth, used the words " in the first instant of His
Conception," of the conception of His Holy Body.
For he put the question thus, " Whether the Body
of Christ was animated in the first moment of His
Conception ? " The question would have been
absurd, had the words, " in the first moment of His
Conception," in themselves implied any more than
the conception of His Body. For it would have been
to ask, " whether His Soul was in His Holy Body,
when He took at once His Body and Soul?" S.
Thomas obviously meant to ask, whether, upon
that operation of God the Holy Ghost, whereby
His Holy Body was formed in the Virgin's womb,
His Soul (contrary to what was at that time sup-
posed to be the case in ordinary conception) was
present in His Body. For he goes on to argue
against the applicability of the Aristotelian grounds
for denying that the body was ordinarily animated
at the first, to the Conception of our Divine Lord.
While, then, I am truly thankful that Mgr.
Dupanloup and yourself still maintain the old dis-
tinction, I hope that I shall not seem to you at
least, my dearest friend, to be presuming, if I think
that, in this too, an explanation, which would re-
move difficulties from us, would be of service to
you, if the Church of Rome wishes the Imma-
culate Conception, as matter of faith, to be under-
stood of the soul only of the Blessed Virgin, and
not of her body also. Without some such expla-
nation, I should have feared that the belief of the
64 Grounds of Scripture and Tradition
Immaculate Conception among you would be what
to us seems the most natural explanation of the
words of the Bull, that in the Blessed Virgin, as in
her Divine Son, both body and soul were conceived
immaculately, the only difference being, that the
Conception of the body in her case, though in the way
of nature, was immaculate, by virtue of His foreseen
merits ; in His case, it was immaculate, there being
nothing to defile it. You must have heard, from
time to time, of a maxim among Marian writers,
that, of two admissible aspects of doctrine, that is to
be preferred which does most honour to the Blessed
Virgin; a maxim which, I suppose, would find its
way here too in popular devotion^
6. With regard to the larger subject of the Imma-
culate Conception, as a whole, some explanation
could possibly be given, to soften the apparent con-
tradiction of the doctrine to Holy Scripture, as inter-
preted by the long tradition in the Church. The
Scotists did not conceal the apparent contradiction.
Thus, Biel enumerates authorities against the con-
clusion to which he had come 3 :
" The second conclusion according to that opinion, ' The
Virgin Mary was not preserved from the contagion of original
sin in the first moment of her animation.' They endeavour to
prove this by authority and reason. By authority of the
Apostle, Rom. v. [12], ' In Adain all sinned.' For he says, 'As
through one man sin came into this world, and death by sin,
and so death passed upon all men, in whom (quo) all sinned,'
all who were in him according to the ( ratio seminalis.' Also
Horn. iii. [23], ' All have sinned and come short of the glory of
God.' The Interlineary G-loss says, 'sinned in themselves or in
8 in Sent. 3. 3. q. 1.
against the Imm. Cone, quoted by Biel. 65
Adam.' Also,l Cor. xv. [22], ' As in Adam all die, so in Christ
shall all be made alive.' Also. Eph. ii. [3], ' We were all chil-
dren of wrath.' In all these places, the Apostle speaks univer-
sally without exception ; therefore under that universality the
Virgin is comprised, being a daughter of Adam, and having been
bom in Adam ' secundem rationem seminalem.' Gregory of
Ariminum says here (in ii. dist. 30. q. 2), ' Since by human
reason certainty cannot be had on this matter, that seems to me
rather to be held which is most consonant to sacred scripture,
which, wherever it speaks hereon, delivers an universal sentence
as to all, without any exception.'
" This same is proved by authority of the saints. For the
blessed Augustine in the ' de fide ad Petrum,' c. 23 [S. Ful-
gentius, Bened. in S. Aug. Opp. vi. p. 18. App.], 'Hold most
firmly and no wise doubt, that every man who is conceived by
intercourse of man and woman is born with original sin, sub-
ject to ungodliness and liable to death, and therefore is by
nature born a child of wrath. Of whom the Apostle says,
"We too were children of wrath even as others." ' Also on
that of John i., ' " Behold the Lamb of God." He alone was
innocent Who did not so come, i.e. by propagation [Tract,
iv. n. 10. p. 316. Ben.]. Also de perfect, just. [c. ult. T. x.
p. 188], ' Whoever then thinks that there was or is in this life
any man or any men, except the One Mediator of God and
man, to whom remission of sins was not necessary, contradicts
Divine -Scripture,' quoting Horn. v. as above. Also de Nupt.
et Cone. [i. n. 13], ' Christ willed not to be born of cohabi-
tation ; that thence too He might teach, that every one who is
born of cohabitation is flesh of sin, since That alone which was
not born therefrom, was not flesh of sin,' and consequently the
flesh of the Virgin, which was born of cohabitation, was flesh
of sin. Also against Julian (ii. 36), who denied that children
contracted original sin, he says the same, ' If beyond doubt the
Flesh of Christ is not flesh of sin, but like unto flesh of sin,
what remains but that we understand that, It excepted, all
other human flesh is flesh of sin?' and shortly after [c. 15. n.
52], 'The Body of Christ is thence said to be "in the likeness
of flesh of sin," because whosoever denies that all other flesh of
66 Authorities against Imm. Cone, quoted by
man is flesh of sin, and so compares the Flesh of Christ with
the flesh of other men who are born, so as to assert that both
are of the like purity, is found to be a detestable heretic.' And
de G-en. ad lit. x. c. 23 [x. 18. n. 32. Ben.], 'Accordingly the
Body of Christ, although it was taken from the flesh of woman
who had been conceived from that stock of sin, yet, because It
was not so conceived in her, as she had been conceived, neither
was He flesh of sin, but likeness of flesh of sin.' Where it
clearly appears that he thought that the flesh of the Blessed
Virgin was flesh of sin. Also in the de fide ad Pet. [n. 16],
* Because the cohabitation of parents is not without passion,
therefore the conception of the children born of their flesh can-
not be without sin, when not propagation, but passion, trans-
mits sin to the little ones.' But it is known that neither the
Blessed Virgin nor any other human being, besides Christ, was
conceived without cohabitation of parents. Also Ambrose on
Luke [L. ii. n. 36, quoted by S. Aug. c. Julian, i. n. 10], ' The
Lord Jesus Alone, of all born of woman, was throughout holy,
Who, by the newness of His Immaculate Birth, did not feel the
contagion of earthly corruption, and by His Heavenly Majesty
dispelled it.' If then ' Christ Alone,' then no others, and so
neither His virgin Mother. And on Isaiah [quoted by S. Aug. de
Nupt. et Concup. i. fin.], ' Therefore He was, as Man, tempted
in all things, and in the likeness of man endured all things.
For all men are liars, and no one is without sin, but God only.
That then is maintained, that from man and woman, i.e. through
that corporeal union, no one should seem free from sin. For
He Who is free from sin, is free also from this mode of concep-
tion.' Also Dama, ' The Holy Grhosfc cleansed her with one
word.' But cleansing is only from sin ; therefore she had sin ;
not actual ; therefore original. And Leo, in a sermon on the
Lord's Nativity, 'As He found none free from guilt, so He
came to free all.' Also Anselm (Cur Deus homo, ii. 16) says,
' Because by His Death which was to be, that Virgin too of
whom He was born and many others were cleansed from sin ;'
if then they were cleansed from sin, then she had sin before her
cleansing. And P. Lombard, iii. L. 3 : 'It may be said and
believed, according to the agreement of the attestation of the
Biel : special weight of S. Augustine's. 67
saints, that the very Elesh of the "Word was Itself before
subject to sin, like the rest of the flesh of the Virgin, but
was cleansed by the operation of the Holy Ghost, so that, free
from all contagion, it should be united to the Word.' Lo,
he says, ' that the flesh of the Virgin was subject to sin, and
was cleansed by the operation of the Holy Grhost.' Very
many other like things may be alleged out of the sayings of
the saints." Then, after quoting S. Bernard, he adds, from
the Decretals, de Consecr. dist. iii. c. i. [where the Assump-
tion and Nativity of the Blessed Virgin are enumerated
among the festivals, not the Conception], "It is said in the
gloss : ' Of the Feast of the Conception nothing is said, be-
cause it is not to be celebrated as it is in many countries, and
chiefly in England. And this is the reason, because she was
conceived in sin, as also the other saints, except the Oue
Person of Christ.5 "
The quotations from S. Augustine are, I think,
the more remarkable, because of the care which he
took to guard himself against seeming to ascribe
actual sin to the Blessed Virgin. When affirming
against Pelagius, that no one was exempt from
actual sin, he protests that, for reverence to our
Lord, he would not speak of the B. V. (whom
Pelagius had instanced among others) when speak-
ing of sins.
"Except then the holy Virgin Mary, of whom, for the
honour of the Lord, I will that no question whatever should
be had, when sins are treated of; — for whence know we, what
more of grace, for the overcoming of sin altogether, may have
been conferred upon Tier, who obtained to conceive and bear
Him, of whom it is known that He had no sin ? — excepting then
this Virgin, if we could bring together all the other holy men
and women, while they lived here, and could ask them whether
E2
68 S. Aug., declining to speak of sins of
they were without sin, what can we suppose that they would
answer? what that man [Pelagius] said, or what the Apostle
John said ? I pray you, whatever was the eminence of their
sanctity in this body, if they could be asked, would they not
have cried out with one voice, ' If we say that we have no sin,
we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us4?"
Now from this very passage, which, with a passage
of S. Anselm, was put forth by the Scotists as the
proof from authority that the B. V. had not origi-
nal sin, I should have rather inferred that S. Au-
gustine believed that she was not exempted from it.
For he does not pronounce that it was certain that
she never had any venial sin. The subject was
hateful to him, for honour of his Lord, and he
would have nothing to do with it. But the con-
trast with the certainty, that our Lord had no sin,
leaves some shade of uncertainty. And yet had
he believed that the B. V. was born as exempt
from original sin as our first parents, then any sin
whatever would have been the repetition of Adam's
fall; which were of all things the most unimagi-
nable and abhorrent. Then too, the expression,
"Whence know we, what more of grace for the
conquering of sin altogether, may have been be-
stowed upon her?" which some Schoolmen so
strangely quoted, as if it implied exemption from
original sin ', I should have thought, at least im-
4 De Nat. et G-rafc. c. 30.
6 Biel says 1. c., " "We are said to conquer sin, which never
was in us, when we are preserved by grace from it, that it
master us not." Even this we could not say, unless we had
B. V., implies Conception in original sin. 69
plied the existence of a tendency to sin within, the
" fomes peccati." One could speak of " overcoming
the world," " overcoming Satan," meaning thereby
overcoming the might or the external temptations
of Satan or the world. But sin has no temptations
except from within. To " overcome sin" must be,
one should think, to overcome its risings within
one's self.
S. Antonine, I see, insists that S. Augustine,
when rejecting all question of sins in regard to the
B. V., in honour of our Lord, meant the same sins,
which, in contrast with her, he affirms of the rest
of mankind, viz., actual sins.
" 6 In answer to this authority, it is said according to Thomas
[Aquinas] and Durandus, that Augustine is speaking there of
actual sins, as is clear and patent from what precedes and fol-
lows in that book, and from the authority of John in his first
canonical Epistle, which Augustine immediately afterwards ad-
duces : ' If we say that we have no sin, &c.' But all Doctors
agree in this, that the Virgin alone among adults was free from
venial sin too."
But, apart from this, it seems to me utterly in-
conceivable, that a writer so careful as S. Augus-
tine, who revised his works and retracted inaccu-
rate expressions of so very slight account, who
some involuntary tendency to the sin ; but conception in
original sin is antecedent to human will, and no matter for
struggle or victory.
6 Summa, P. i. Tit. 8. c. 2. de Concept. B. M. i. 552.
Verona, 1740.
70 Force of S. Augustine's exception of our
guarded his language, and, on the subject of actual
sin, made the specific exception in regard to the
B. V., should have spoken so absolutely and with-
out all exception as to the derivation of original
sin to every one born as we all are born, unless he
had believed that no exception was to be made;
and this the more, since he is speaking, not of our
liability to those consequences of the fall, which
the inheritance of original sin involves, but of the
fact, that Christ Alone had been born without sin,
because He alone was born, not of human gene-
ration, not in the way in which His blessed Mother
was born. When he is speaking of actual sin, he
does except the Blessed Virgin, out of reverence
to our Lord.
Often as, in consequence of the necessity of
warning his people or the Church against the Pe-
lagians, he had to speak, formally and dogmatically,
of the universality of original sin and of the mode
of its transmission, he never makes more than one
exception, the Person of our Lord. The very pains
which people have been at, to make the occasion in
which he exempts the B. V. from actual sins, to
include original sin also, brings out the more the
force of the omission. It is not S. Augustine's
way to allow any grave statement of his belief to
rest on an expression, which does not, according to
the natural force of the terms, contain it. Accord-
ing to modern defenders of the doctrine of the Im-
maculate Conception, the omission was not a mere
Lord Alone from original sin. 71
slip of S. Augustine's, upon a subject which was
not under discussion, language (inadvertently on
Irs part) too broad and comprehensive.
According to them, he did mean to except the
B. V. once, although it does not seem to have oc-
curred to any one that he did, until the Scotists
wished to shelter themselves under his authority.
But if so, it must have occurred to him that he had
not excepted her distinctly even there, and, that
every where else he had written, as one would, who
did not mean to exclude her. The one work in
which he so wrote, was written, A.D. 415, when S.
Augustine was 60, fifteen years before his decease.
Though circulated, as all his works were, it was
written originally to individuals. He could not an-
ticipate that what he had thus written, would be
known, as it is now, to all who know his works at
all, and to tens of thousands who do not know
them. Yet neither in what he wrote subsequently
upon the universality of the transmission of origi-
nal sin to all born after the law of our birth, did
he make any exception, nor in his Retractations
did he say that he had failed to make that one
exception ; and yet even in works later than this
date, he corrected very minute mistakes.
You, my dear friend, will not think that it is in
any spirit of controversy that I put together from
the collections of Cardinal de Turrecremata, De
Bandelis, and others, a series bearing upon the
Immaculate Conception.
72 Object of reproducing the citations of Card.
The work of Cardinal de Turrecremata (who,
when he compiled it, was Magister Palatii at Rome)
was no ordinary work. It was executed when he
was of mature age (he was 49 when he completed
it), with full access to libraries, " at the mandate of
the legates of the Apostolic See, then presiding over
the. Council of Basle 7," on the affirmative side, viz.,
"that the B. V. was conceived in original sin."
(The other side was executed by John of Segovia.)
Of course, he had difficulties, printing not being yet
invented. And so he states that he had omitted
very many authorities, which he had seen in libra-
ries, because he could not ascertain the names of
the authors ; partly too he was hindered by lack of
time, and he limited his selection to one hundred
authorities. But what he quoted, with the exception
of very few passages, he says, that he had seen
with his own eyes. His own statement, prepared
for the Synod, was : —
" 8 Behold, O sacred Synod, 100 witnesses, who, being most
profound Doctors in Divine and Canon law, or very learned
Fathers, give a most clear testimony to the side of the question
for which you have entrusted me with the ministry, viz., that
7 This is stated in the title, " Tractatus de veritate conceptio-
nis Beatiss. V. pro facienda relatione coram Patribus Cone,
Bas. A.D. 1437, mense Julio de mandate Sedis Aposfcolicse lega-
torura, eidem S. Concil. Praesidentium, per H. P. F. Joann. de
Turrecremata S.T.P. ord. Pra3d., tune S. Apost. Palatii Magis-
trum, postea S. R. E. Cardinalem Episc. Sabin. Eomae 1547."
8 P. vii. init. extracted in De Alva's Trituratio, pp. 22, 23.
de Turrecremata : character of his work. 73
the most Bl. Virgin was in her conception subject to original
sin. To whom it would be easy to add many others, consider-
ing that the faith and doctrine of almost all the ancient expo-
sitors of the Bible and Doctors of the schools, who are of more
celebrated authority, fame, and opinion, tends to that side of the
question. 'But, for the present, I have been content with this
number, because the number of 100 is held perfect in Holy
Scripture (as the gloss says, Deut. 22), as also because want of
opportunity and multiplicity of occupations did not permit me
to visit several libraries ; also, because although I found in
libraries, which I visited, many other Doctors, both on the
Sentences and in expositions of the Bible, and in treatises made
in praise of the most Bl. V., who taught and preached this doc-
trine, and left it in their writings for instructing the Christian
people, yet, since I often could not know their names, I
decided not to quote the sayings of these many Doctors. But
the testimonies of the 100 Doctors or venerable Fathers, (except
some very few, of whose judgment I had knowledge from the
faithful report of others,) I have seen in their originals with my
own eyes."
These authorities are but a small portion of his
important work 9. To him was assigned the office
9 The work is so manifestly one whole, from one mind, at
one time, and that, engaged in close, hand-to-hand, yet peace-
loving, controversy with the opposite party, with continual
reference to each of the opponents, and occasionally to
preachers of sermons at the Synod, and to the fathers of the
Synod itself, with even the recurrence of rare expressions, that
De Alva must have looked very superficially at the book (as his
character was), that he could speak of its citations, at one time,
as the work of Barth. Spina, General of the Order, Prof, of Theol.
and Master of the Apostolic Palace, who directed the publication,
and, while able, laboured on it ; at another, of Alb. Duimius,
Domin. Prof, at Borne, who corrected errors which had crept
into the MSS. in the 110 years between its delivery and its
printing. They were merely Editors. Pref. of Alb. Duim. to
De Turr.'s work.
74 Character of De Turrecrematrfs Work.
of answering what had been said by the two advo-
cates on the other side, supporting what had been
said by his colleague the Provincial of Lombardy,
to whom the opening of the subject had been com-
mitted. He followed the arguments of his oppo-
nents, step by step, even at the cost of repetition,
and supported his allegations of Holy Scripture or
his arguments by the traditional interpretations,
and advanced nothing unsupported. His extracts
are conscientiously and carefully made, as one
would expect from him, especially upon such an
occasion. Even De Alva, who is unsparing of his
accusations of those who wrote on that side, and
who often finds fault for inaccuracy, where there is
none to be found, is frequently compelled to own
the authentic way in which Cardinal de Turrecre-
mata cites his authorities, or contrasts it with the
less exact citations of others. De Alva, on the other
hand, who accuses so confidently, falls at times into
the slips, to which self-confidence and suspicious-
ness expose any one. He is useful in checking
citations, but he has need to be checked himself ;
for he declares authors or their works to have been
non-existent or forged, because he could not him-
self trace them, or two writers to be the same,
because he had not the means of distinguishing
them. Quetif's belief was the same as De Alva's,
yet in his learned " Library of the Dominicans," he
has noticed some of these mistakes of De Alva's in
regard to Dominican writers ; and he uses the ex-
De Bandelis. 75
pression, " ' if it had not been an ascertained thing,
that he (De Alva) ran lightly over the authors
who occurred to him."
The careful study of his elaborate work makes
one think heavily, that, had it ever been read to the
Council, their decision (which was counted exten-
sively as the decision of the Church) might have
been stayed. As it was, they decided under the
influence of unanswered arguments and (of which
De Turrecremata complains) invidious declamation.
De Bandelis 2 appeared to me to have quoted less
exactly 3. At least, he has sometimes important
words which do not occur in the present texts, and
sometimes gives an epitome of a passage rather
1 Biblioth. Prsecl, art. F. Hugo Argentin. i. 470.
3 " De singular! puritate et prserogativa Conceptionis Salva-
toris nostri Jesu Christ! ex auctoritatibus 260 Doctorum illus-
trium."— Printed at Bologna, A.D. 1481.
8 In such a mass of authorities, he has, I may say, of course,
made mistakes. As the list in Melchior Canus (referred to,
"Eirenicon," p. 178) rests doubtless on his authority, I would
say he was probably mistaken about S. Bernardine ; the sermon
which he ascribes to S. Antony of Padua has not been found,
although S. Antony, if I understand him aright, does not express
any opposite belief. S. Erhardus, or Gerardus, Bishop and
Martyr, is the same as a " Bishop and Martyr " quoted by De
Turrecremata. Sometimes, too, De B. has quoted the same
author under two or more names (such as he found probably
in his MSS.), although not so often as De Alva imputes to
him. In the absence of bibliographies it was almost impossible
to avoid it. It was not obvious, e. g., to an Italian, that " Ki-
chardus Eadulphi [Richard Fitz Ralph], Chancellor of Oxford,"
was the same as " Dom. Armachanus," i.e. Archbishop of
Armagh.
76 Importance of an adequate
than its exact words 6. His citations too are often
(in the way of S. Thomas Aquinas in the Catena
Aurea) made up of disjointed sentences, which he
enwreathes into one whole. I have then used his
work as a convenient index, but I have (sometimes
with some labour) given the exact words and a
fuller context, although, in this way, often not so
salient as they stand in his work 7.
No one can wish more earnestly than myself
that a solution of these authorities8 should be found,
and should be authoritatively given. I wish this
as earnestly now, as I did wish beforehand, that
the Immaculate Conception should not be made
a matter of faith, but left as a matter of 'pious
opinion ;' and I wish it on the self-same grounds ;
fifteen years ago, that there might be no fresh diffi-
6 I have seen this stated in one case by Deza, his continua-
tor, as quoted by De Alva.
7 As the works from which they quote for the first 1100 years,
have been since printed, I have inserted nothing during that
period, which I have not myself verified. Wherever I have sub-
sequently used authorities from Turrecremata, still unprinted, I
have referred to him. Sometimes De Alva himself quotes a
MS. containing De Turrecremata's authority and agreeing with
it except in unimportant variations, or in giving a fuller context,
as De Turrecremata says he understood "compendiousness" to
belong to his ofiice. In these cases, I have translated from De
Alva's extracts. In one or two cases I have found the passage in
Quetif. Later authorities, which rest on Turrecremata alone, I
have, when I have cited them, marked with a f.
8 I have weighed carefully what De Alva says, though, his
work being a folio, it would be wearisome to any reader to in-
troduce it in controversy.
explanation of this tradition. 77
culty in the way of re-union ; now, that, if possible,
the definition, made in 1854, should be so explained
as not to be an obstacle. But you have no internal
ground to give any such solution, since there is no
question about the doctrine among you. When
the building is raised, the scaffolding is not wanted;
nor is any question had about the difficulties ex-
perienced in raising it. These become mere matter
of history. If, then, there is to be any explanation,
(and an explanation is of much moment towards
the re-union of Christendom, East and West too,)
the impulse must come to you from without. In
the view, then, of obtaining an authoritative expla-
nation, I have re-arranged this body of tradition,
which cannot, I think, be simply set aside, without
destroying altogether the value of tradition as a
witness of truth. Whatever this or that Father
or middle-age writer may be said not to mean, it is
of moment, that it should be shown, what this con-
current testimony, spread over so many centuries,
does mean, based, as so much of it is, on words of
Holy Scripture, that God sent His Son in "the
likeness of flesh of sin."
Perrone, following P. Benedict Piazza, divides
the authorities into five classes: "9(1) those testi-
monies, in which it is asserted that God Alone or
Christ Alone is without any sin, without making
any mention of original sin; (2) those, which affirm
9 De Imni. B. V. Cone. p. 57.
78 Perrone — Patristic authorities in Jive classes.
that the whole human race is infected with original
sin, without specially naming the Blessed Virgin;
(3) those, in which Fathers teach, that, Christ
Alone excepted, all men are defiled with that origi-
nal stain ; (4) those, which maintain that the flesh
of the Blessed Virgin was flesh of sin; (5) those,
in which Fathers assert in plain terms, that the
Blessed Virgin was sanctified, cleansed, purged"
Perrone contents himself with considering some
of the two last classes. I have myself mostly
omitted the first. The force of the third class
Perrone has, I think, naturally understated. To me
its great weight seems to lie, not in the fact of the
contrast alone between our Lord and His redeemed,
but that the exemption of our Lord's Human Nature
from original sin is ascribed to the difference of the
mode of His Conception. All, those Fathers teach,
have been born subject to the original sin, who
received their being after the way of nature; our
Lord's Human Nature Alone was not so subjected,
because He was not conceived after the way of
nature ; He was conceived, not of man, but of the
Holy Ghost. The very nature of the contrast
compels the Fathers to speak of the Blessed Virgin.
Her conception must have been consequently pre-
sent to their minds. Original sin did not, they
say, pass to our Lord, because He was conceived of
His Mother in a way in which she was not con-
ceived. Had they thought that she had been ex-
cepted, it seems almost impossible, that no one of
Special weight of third class. S. Irenceus. 79
them should have made the exception. For it is
not a case of oratorical or devotional language, or
of a general confession of our hereditary sinfulness.
They are dogmatic statements, carefully worded.
The earlier Fathers, who speak on the subject,
belong chiefly to Perrone's second class. Yet,
S. Augustine gathers them into one, as attesting
the belief of the Church as to the universal trans-
mission of original sin to all naturally born of
Adam. The writers themselves are naturally more
or less full or precise. S. Augustine takes cer-
tain expressions (e. g. those of S. Irenseus) as key-
notes of a system of faith, which they implied, but
which those Fathers did not fully explain. These
I give on S, Augustine's authority, else I should not
have cited them. Yet, with such a full statement
as Origen's, one cannot doubt, even apart from
S. Augustine's authority, that the Catholic writers
before him, whom Pelagius claimed, not only held
the doctrine of original sin, but the mode of its
transmission, as contained in the fuller statements.
This gleams through in most of the writers quoted.
1. S. IrenaBus lays stress on S. Paul's words,
" the likeness of the flesh of sin," as belonging to
our Lord, in contrast with the rest of mankind 10.
" No otherwise could men be saved from the ancient wound
of the serpent unless they believe in Him, Who, in the likeness
of flesh of sin, being lifted up from the earth on the wood of
witness, drew all things to Himself and quickened the dead."
10 iv. 2. 7, quoted by S. Aug. c. Julian, i. 3, Opp. x. 500.
80 Tertullian.
I had perhaps better add Tertullian and Origen
here, (although not quoted by S. Augustine,)
because the explicitness of their statements (borne
out by S. Ambrose and other Catholic writers)
shows that, long before the Pelagian controversy,
the mode of transmission of original sin was stated
in connexion with Psalm li., and that no exception
was made.
2. Tertullian, about A.D. 109, wrote —
Satan, " ! whom we call the angel of wickedness, the con-
triver of all evil, the corruptor of the whole world, through
whom man, being from the beginning beguiled, so that he
transgressed the commandments of God, and on that account
being given over unto death, hath henceforth made his whole
race, that is infected of his seed, the transmitters of his con-
demnation also."
And, in a work after his fall into Montanism —
" 2 This, too, appertaineth to the faith, that Plato divides the
soul into rational and irrational. Which definition we too
approve, yet not so, that both be ascribed to nature. For the
rational must be believed to be natural, being inborn in the
soul from the beginning, as coming from a rational Author.
But the irrational is to be understood to be later, as having
come from the suggestion of the serpent, that very transgres-
sion of theirs which they admitted, and that thenceforth it
in-grew and grew up together in the soul, having now a sort
of character of nature, because it happened in the very first
beginning of nature3."
1 De Testim. Anim. 3. p. 135. Oxf. Tr.
2 De Anima. c. 16.
3 Lumper (Tertullian, c. 6. art. 10. p. 303) refers in illustra-
tion to Bossuet, t. 2, Defense de la Tradition et des Saints
Peres, L. 8. c. 29. p. 148.
Tertullian. 81
" 4 To such a degree ig well nigh no nativity clean, viz., of
heathens." Then he explains S. Paul (1 Cor. vii. 14) to mean
that the children of believers were clean, as " designated for
holiness ;" " else," he says, "the Apostle well remembered the
decision of the Lord, * Unless one be born of water and the
Spirit, he will not enter into the kingdom of God,' i. e. he will
not be holy." He proceeds, " So then every soul is so long
counted in Adam, until it be counted anew in Christ ; so long
unclean, until it be so counted anew ; and sinful, because un-
clean, receiving ignominy from the association of the flesh [he
means additional ignominy, since he goes on to speak of the
body as only an instrument of evil]. The evil then of the
soul (besides what is built thereon by the intervention of the
evil spirit) is antecedent from the fault of origin, being in a
manner natural. For, as we said, the corruption of nature is
another nature, having its own god and father, viz. the author
himself of its corruption, yet so that there is good too in the
soul, that which is principal, that which is divine and genuine,
and properly natural. For that which is from God is not so
much extinguished as overshadowed. For it can be over-
shadowed, because it is not God ; it cannot be extinguished,
because it is from God. So theo, as light, hindered by some
obstacle, abides, but appears not, if the density of the hindrance
be adequate, so also the good in the soul, oppressed by the evil,
according to the quality of that evil, is either missing altogether,
the light suffering occultation, or shines, when allowed, having
gained freedom. So some are exceeding evil, some exceeding
good, and yet all are one kind of soul. So in the worst, too,
there is something of good, and in the best there is something
of the worst. For God Alone is without sin, and the only
Man without sin is Christ, because Christ is also God.'*
And in another —
" 5 For which cause also, we were 'children of wrath,' he
saith, but ' by nature,' lest, because the Creator had called the
4 Ib. c. 39-41. 6 Adv, Marc, v. 17. pp. 608, 609. Rig.
F
82 Absolute universality of original sin ;
Jews children, the heretic might argue, that the Lord was the
creator of wrath. For when he says, ' we were by nature
children of wrath,' but the Jews were sons of the Creator, not
by nature, but by election of the fathers, he referred their
being ' children of wrath ' to ' nature/ not to the Creator.
Subjoining, as 'also the rest,' who clearly are not sons of God.
He appears to ascribe sins and concupiscences of the flesh, and
unbelief and anger, to the common nature of all men, yet [he
doth so], the devil taking captive nature, which too he himself
already infected, by bringing in the seed of transgression."
3. Origen:
" 6 But if you would hear what other saints also think of that
birth [in the flesh], hear David saying, ' I was conceived in
iniquities, and in sins did my mother bear me,' showing that
whatsoever soul is born in the flesh is polluted by the defile-
ment of iniquity and sin ; and that therefore is that said, which
we have mentioned above, that ' no one is clean from defilement,
not even if his life be of one day.' "
"7 Whosoever cometh into this world is said to be made in a
certain contamination. "Wherefore also Scripture saith, 'No
one is clean from defilement, not even if his life be of one day.'
For from the very fact, that he was placed in his mother's
womb, and takes the matter of his body from the origin of his
father's seed, he may be said to be contaminated in father and
in mother. Or know you not, that when the male child is
forty days old, it is offered at the altar, to be purified there, as
having been polluted in the conception itself, either of the
paternal seed or the maternal womb ? Every man, then, was
polluted in father and in mother, but Jesus, my Lord, Alone
entered pure into this generation ; He was not defiled in His
mother. For He entered a body undefiled [being a virgin].
For He it was, "Who had said long before too through Solomon,
' But rather, being good, I came to a body undefiled.' He was
6 Orig. in Lev. Horn. 8. n. 3. T. ii. p. 230. ed. De la Eue.
7 Ib. Horn. 12. n. 4. Ib. p. 251.
Origen, S. Cyprian. 83
not then defiled in His mother, but neither was He in His
father. For Joseph yielded no part in His generation, except
ministry and love. "Wherefore also, for his faithful ministry,
Scripture granted him the name of father. Eor so Mary her-
self saith in the Grospel, ' Behold I and Thy father have sought
Thee sorrowing.' So then He alone is the great High Priest,
"Who was defiled neither in father nor mother."
" 8 But of that regeneration [in the world to come, S. Matt.
xix. 28], the prelude is, that which is called in Paul the wash-
ing of regeneration, and [the prelude] of that newness is that
which followeth upon the washing of regeneration in that of
renewal of life. But, perhaps, according to birth too, 'no one
is clean from defilement, not if his life be one day,' on account
of the mystery concerning the birth, in regard to which [birth]
each one of all who have come to the birth may say that which
was said by David in the 50th Psalm, thus, that ' I was con-
ceived in transgressions, and in sins was my mother pregnant
of me,' but according to the regeneration from the leaven, every
one who has been born from above of water and the Spirit, is
clean from defilements, to speak boldly, clean ' through a glass
and darkly,' &c."
"9 Or, rather, it seemeth that this [Eom. v. 14] ought to be
taken simply, that ' the likeness of Adam's transgression ' ought
to be received without any discussion, so that by this saying all
who are born of Adam, the transgressor, should seem to be
indicated, and to have in themselves the likeness of his trans-
gression, received in themselves, not only from the seed, but
also from education."
4. S. Cyprian and his African Council of sixty-
six Bishops, — in that celebrated response, in which
S. Augustine says that " 10 the question whether it
was lawful for an infant to be baptized before the
8 In S. Matt. T. 15. n. 23. Opp. iii. 685, 686.
9 In Eom. T. 5. n. i. Opp. iv. 550.
10 Contr. 2 Epp. Pelag. iv.. 8 n. 23. Opp. x. 481. See other
places of S. Aug. in S. Cyprian's Epistles, p. 195. n. Oxf. Tr.
F 2
84 Universality of original sin. Reticius,
eighth day, was so handled, as though, through the
Providence of God, the Catholic Church were
already confuting the Pelagian heretics, who were
to rise so long after," — say,
" ' If then to the most grievous offenders, and who had before
sinned much against God, when they afterwards believe, re-
mission of sins is granted, and no one is debarred from Baptism
and grace, how much more ought not an infant to be debarred,
who, being newly born, has in no way sinned, except that,
being born after Adain in the flesh, he has by the first birth
contracted the contagion of the old death, who is on this very
account more easily admitted to receive remission of sins, in
that not his own but another's sins are remitted to him."
S. Jerome quotes 2 besides from S. Cyprian's col-
lection of texts of Holy Scripture, arranged under
heads, the heading 3, " That none is born without
defilement and without sin." In support of which
S. Cyprian alleges Ps. li. 5, "Behold I was con-
ceived in iniquities, and in sins did my mother
conceive me ;" and 1 John i. 8, " If we say that we
have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is
not in us."
S. Cyprian unites actual and original sin, and
denies the exemption of any from either of them.
5. Reticius, Bp. of Autun, one of the three
Bishops appointed by Constantine to judge with
'•S. Cyprian and Afric. Council to Fidus, Ep. 64 fin.
2 Dial. c. Pelag. n. 32. Opp. ii. 715. ed. Vail.
3 Testira. iii. 64. Treatises, p. 100. Oxf. Tr.
S. Hilary. 85
Melchiades Bp. of Rome in the case of the Dona-
tists 4, said of Baptism ;
" 5 Every one knows that this is the chief forgiveness in the
Church, in which we put off the whole weight of the old sin,
and blot out the ancient sins of our ignorance, where too we
put off the old man with our inborn guilt."
5. Augustine dwells on the terms, " weight of
the old sin," " ancient sins," " the old man with
our inborn guilt."
6. Olympius, " G a Spanish Bishop of great glory
in the Church and in Christ," said in a sermon,
" If faith had remained any where on earth uncorrupt, and
had held its footmarks imprinted, which, when marked, it
abandoned, never, by the death-bringing transgression of the
protoplast, would he have infused vice in the germ, so that sin
should be born with man."
7. S. Hilary, like S. Irenseus, dwells on the ex-
pression, " the likeness of the flesh of sin," in our
Lord, in contrast with ours 7.
" Since then He was sent in ' the likeness of flesh of sin,' He
had not sin too, as He had flesh. But because all flesh is from
sin, being derived from sin, i. e. from Adam our parent, He was
sent in ' the likeness of flesh of sin,' there being in Him not
sin, but ' the likeness of flesh of sin.' "
4 Eus. H. E. x. 5. S. Augustine dwells on the fact of his
so judging, as showing that he was " of great authority in the
Church."
5 Ap. S. Aug. c. Julian, i. 7. p. 501.
0 Ib. § 8.
7 Prom an unknown and lost work in S. Aug. 1. c. § 9.
86 Orig. sin derived from mode of our conception.
S. Hilary elsewhere 8 speaks of
" The Apostolic faith attesting that ' the Man Christ Jesus
was found in fashion as a man,' and was sent in 'the likeness of
flesh of sin/ so that, being ' in fashion as a man,' He should be
in the form of a servant, and not be in the defects of nature ;
and being in ' the likeness of flesh of sin,' should indeed
be the "Word-Flesh, yet be in ' the likeness of flesh of sin/
rather than be the flesh of sin itself; and, being the Man
Christ Jesus, should be Man, yet so that, in the Man, He
could be nothing else than Christ is ; and thus that He should
both be born Man, by the birth of the body, and yet not be in
the faults of man, not leing in the origin ; because ' the Word
made Mesh ' could not but be the Flesh which It was made,
and the Word, although made Flesh, yet did not part with Its
being the Word ; and while ' the Word, made Flesh/ cannot
lack the Nature of His origin, It could not but abide in the
origin of His own Nature, that He was the Word ; nor yet
could the Word not be understood to be truly the Flesh which
He was made; yet so that, since He dwelt among us, that
Flesh was not the Word, but the Flesh of the Word dwelling
in the flesh."
S. Augustine quotes S. Hilary again as con-
8 De Trin. x. 26. p. 1054. Ben. The Bened. comment on
the passage is, " We have in this section the sum of what had
been hitherto proved, that the Word, taking Flesh, did not
lose what He was, and took the verity of human nature, not its
defects. The ground, why Hilary so earnestly maintained the
distinction of the Divine and Human Nature in Christ, was to
prove that our infirmities, which the heretics ascribed wrongly
to the Divine Nature, were incidental'only to the Human. But
since it was unfitting that the G-od-united Man should be sub-
ject to the dominion of passions, he shows appositely, that
Christ knew not the foul beginnings of our conception, and so
was not liable to our passions, as far as they are injurious and
vicious, and have rule over us."
S. Hilary, £ Ambrose. 87
necting our original sin with the mode of our con-
ception ;
" ' 9 My soul shall live and it shall praise Thee, and Thy
judgments shall help me.' He doth not think that he lives, in
this life, in that he said, ' Behold I was conceived in iniquities,
and in sins did my mother bear me.' He knows that he was
born under the origin of sin and under the law of sin."
8. From S. Ambrose, besides the passages already
cited by Biel !, S. Augustine quotes his comment
on David's words, "Behold I was conceived in
wickedness, and in sins did my mother bear me."
" 2 Before we are born, we are stained by contagion ; and,
before we enjoy the light, we receive the injury of our origin
itself, we are conceived in iniquity. He did not express,
whether of our parents or our own. ' And in transgressions
does his mother generate each.' Nor did he declare, whether the
mother generates in her own sins, or whether there be already
some transgressions too of the new-born. But see whether both
are not to be understood. Neither is the conception without
iniquity, since the parents too are not without lapse ; and, if
even the child of a day old is not without sin, much more are
not those days of the maternal conception without sin. "We
are conceived then in the sin of our parents, and we are born
in their iniquities. But the birth itself too has contagions of its
own, nor has nature itself one contagion only." — "In Whom
[Christ] Alone, there was both a virginal conception and birth,
without any defilement of mortal origin. For it was meet,
that He, "Who was to have no sin of bodily prolapsion, should
feel no natural contagion of generation. Sightly then did
David mournfully lament in himself the very defilements of
nature, that stain begins in man earlier than life."
0 In Ps. cxviii. 175. p. 366. Ben.
1 Above, p. 66.
2 Apol. David, c. 11. Opp. i. 694, 695.
88 Christ alone free from original sin by His birth.
" 3 One is our iniquity, another that of our heel, in which
Adam was wounded by the serpent's tooth, and by his own
wound left the inheritance of human succession subject thereto,
so that we all halt through that wound."
And in language which, though ante-Pelagian,
is such as S. Augustine adopted * ;
" It is declared, that salvation should come to the nations
through One, Jesus Christ, "Who Alone could not be righteous,
whereas every generation erred, unless, being born of a Virgin,
He was by no means held by the law, which lay upon a guilty
generation. He who was counted righteous above the rest,
says, ' Behold I was conceived in .wickednesses, and in sin my
mother bare me.' Whom then should I now call righteous,
save One free from these chains, "Whom the chains of the
common nature hold not ? All are under sin ; from Adam
over all death reigned. Let Him come, Who Alone was right-
eous in the sight of God, of Whom it should be said, now no
longer with limitation, ' He sinned not in His lips/ but, ' He
did no sin.' "
S. Augustine then asks Julian, whether he would
venture to say to S. Ambrose too, "that, since
he excepted Christ Alone from the honds of a
guilty generation, because He was born of a virgin,
whereas all others descended from Adam were
born under the bond of sin, which sin the devil
sowed, he made the devil the creator of all born
from the union of the sexes."
"Confute him" (he says) "as a condemner of marriage,
who says that the Yirgin's Son was Alone born without sin."
3 On Ps. xlviii. 6. n. 8. Opp. i. 947, quoted in S. Aug. c.
Jul. i. 3.
4 Quoted by S. Aug. c. Julian, ii. 2, and cont. 2 Epp. Pelag.
iv. n. 29, from S. Ambrose's de Area Noe, not there now.
S. Ambrose, S. Augustine. 89
He further quotes from S. Ambrose;
" 6 Christ was therefore immaculate, because neither was He
maculate by the wonted condition of birth itself."
"6He [Peter] offered himself for that which he, before,
thought sin, asking that not his feet only, but his head also
should be washed ; because he had immediately understood
that, by the washing of the feet, which in the first man slipped,
the defilement of the guilty succession was done away."
And again, commenting upon the same text, upon
which S. Ifenseus had touched before, and which S.
Augustine expands so often, that " God sent His
Son in the likeness of sinful flesh," he connects our
Lord's sinlessness with His not being born, as all
besides were born.
" 7 He does not say, ' into the likeness of flesh,' because
Christ took the verity, not ' the likeness ' of human flesh. Nor
does he say, ' into the likeness of sin,' for He did no sin, but
was made sin for us. But He came ' into the likeness of flesh
of sin,' i. e. He took the likeness of sinful flesh ; therefore, 'the
likeness,' because it was written, ' And He is a man, and who
shall acknowledge Him ? ' He was a man, in flesh according to
in an, who should be acknowledged ; with virtue above man, who
should not be acknowledged. So also He hath our flesh, but
hath not the faults [vitia] of this flesh. For He was not gene-
rated, as every human being is, of commingling of male and
female; but, being born of the Holy Ghost and the Virgin,
He had received an immaculate Body, which not only no faults
[vitia] had stained, but neither had the injuring concretion of
generation or conception offuscated. For all we, the race of
man, are born under sin, whose very birth is in fault, as thou
5 On Isaiah in S. Aug. c. 2. Epp. Pel. iv. 29, p. 488.
0 Id. ib.
7 De Poenit. i. 3. Opp. ii. 393, 394. The part " all we
. . . guilt " is quoted by S. Aug. ib.
90 Universality of original sin.
hast it read, when David says, 'Behold I was conceived in
iniquities, and in offences did my mother bear me.' Therefore
the flesh of Paul was a body of death, as he himself says,
'"Who shall deliver me from the body of this death?' But
the Flesh of Christ condemned sin, which, being born, He felt
not, which, dying, He crucified; so that in our flesh there
might be justification by grace, where, before, there was defile-
ment through guilt."
Another passage, which S. Augustine quotes
from S. Ambrose as his " teaching, how from that
law of sin, (i. e. from the concupiscence of the flesh,
carnis,) every man is generated, and therefore con-
tracts original sin," I leave untranslated on account
of its strength.
" 8 Hos filios generans David partus illos corporesa com-
mixtionis horrebat, et ideo mundari sacri fontis irriguo desi-
derabat, ut carnalem et terrenam labem gratia spiritualis ab-
lueret. ' Ecce,' inquit, ' in iniquitatibus conceptus sum, et in
delictis peperit me mater mea.' Male Eva parturivit, ut partus
relinqueret mulieribus ha3reditatem, atque unusquisque concu-
piscentise voluptate concretus, et genitalibus visceribus infusus,
et coagulatus in sanguine, in pannis involutus, prius subiret
delictorum contagium quam vitalis spiritus munus hauriret."
S. Augustine explains that the " pannis involutus " is a meta-
phor, " non utique laneis aut lineis, aut hujuscemodi talibus,
qualibus jam nati obvolvuntur infantes, sed pannis vitiatse
originis, tanquam hsBreditariis, involutus."
9. From S. Gregory of Nazianzum, speaking of
Baptism, S. Augustine quotes 9,
" Let the word of Christ too persuade you of this, when He
8 De Sacramento regenerationis, s. de Philosophia in S. Aug.
c. Julian, ii. 6, n. 15.
9 In S. Aug. c. Julian, i. n. 15. T. x. p. 505. The sermon
from which S. Aug. quotes is not extant.
S. Gregory Naz.^ S. Basil 91
saith, that 'no man can enter the kingdom of heaven, unless he
be reborn of water and the Spirit.' By this are the stains of
the first nativity purged, whereby we 'are conceived in iniquities,
and in sins have our mothers borne us.' "
On the other hand, he speaks of the Blessed
Virgin, as having been "fore-purified" before the
Conception of our Lord ;
" * He becomes Man in all things, save sin, having been
conceived by the Virgin who had been fore-purified (TrpoKaOap-
Oeurris) by the Spirit as to both soul and flesh ; for it ought to
be that both His generation should be honoured and that vir-
ginity should be preferred.'*
10. From S. Basil, S. Augustine quotes one pas-
sage, in which he speaks only of the universality
and the transmission of sin from our first parents :
{: 2 Adam received that first command, ' From the tree of the
knowledge of good and evil ye shall not eat.' If Eve had fasted
from the tree, we should not now need this fast. ' For they
who are whole need not a physician, but they who are sick.'
We have been made sick through sin ; let us be healed through
repentance."
Others, perhaps more explicit on the universality
and the transmission of sin, are :
" 3 Adam, eating amiss, transmitted the sin."
" 4 Let him hear the whole truth of the matter, that every
1 Orat. 38. n. 13. p. 671, repeated in Orat. 45. n. 9. pp. 851,
852.
2 Horn. i. de jejunio, n. 3. Opp. ii. 3. Ben.
3 Horn, in fam. et sice. n. 7, fin. Opp. ii. 70. Ben.
4 Horn, in Ps. 48. n. 3. Opp. i. p. 180.
92 Universality of original sin.
human soul was subject to the evil yoke of slavery of the com-
mon enemy of all, and, being deprived of the freedom which it
had from Him Who created it, was led captive through sin.
But every captive has need of ransom for freedom. And in no
way has man power towards God, so as to propitiate Him for a
sinner, since he himself too is subject to sin. ( For all have
sinned, and come short of the glory of Grod, being justified
freely,' Ac."
" 5 Beautiful was I, according to nature, but weak, because
I had been put to death by sin, through the plots of the ser-
pent."
11. Julian the Pelagian falsified a homily of S.
Chrysostom, as though he had said that infants had
no sin, i.e. not original sin, whereas he had said,
that they had " no sins" i.e. not actual sins. From
him S. Augustine quotes the following passages, in
proof that he believed that all were bound by that
primeval sin :
" ° When Adam sinned that grievous sin and condemned
the race of all mankind in common, then was he condemned to
toil."
"If Adam," S. Augustine comments on this, " by
his great sin condemned the whole human race in
5 Horn, in Ps. 29. u. 5. p. 129. The Benedictine Editors
quote also Horn, in Ps. 32. p. 132, d. p. 135, c., and a glowing
passage, Ep. 261. n. 2. T. iii. p. 402, in evidence that " S. Au-
gustine maintained nothing else against the Pelagians, except
what was certain from the perpetual teaching of the Church."
Praef. ad Bas. Opp. T. iii. p. xxxiii.
6 Epist. 3 ad Olympiad, n. 3. T. iii. p. 554. Ben. Quoted
by S. Aug. c. Julian, i. n. 24.
S. Chrysostom. 93
common, is the child born uncondemned ? And
through whom is he delivered save by Christ?"
" 7 Christ cometh once ; He found our paternal debt, which
Adam contracted : he [Adam] brought in the beginning of the
debt; ice increased the usury by our subsequent sins."
S. Augustine marks the expression, that it was
"our paternal debt," which appertained to us, before
we increased it by our subsequent sins. He quotes
also a much longer passage from his Commentary
on S. Paul's words, " By one man sin entered into
the world," which I will give more briefly.
" 8 It is manifest that not this sin, in the transgressing of
the law, but that of the disobedience of Adam it was, which
ruined every thing. * Death reigned from Adam to Moses, over
those too who did not sin.' How did it reign ? in the likeness
of the transgression of Adam, ' who is the image of Him to come.'
For for this cause is Adam also an image of Christ. How an
image ? saith one. Because as lie became, to those born of
him, although not eating of the tree, a cause of death, which
was brought in through that eating, so also Christ became to
those who are from Him, although not having done righteously,
the securer of righteousness, which He bestowed upon us all
through the Cross. — So that when the Jew saith to thee, How,
the one, Christ, doing aright, was the world saved ? you may
say to him, How, the one, Adam, disobeying, was the world
lost? And yet sin and grace are not equal, not equal are
death and life, not equal are the devil and God. — But not as
the offence, so also the free gift, &c. For what he saith is of
this sort. If sin, and that the sin of one man, availed so much,
how shall nofc grace, the grace of God, not of the Father only,
but of the Son also, prevail much more ? — First he said, that if
7 Horn, ad Neophytos, ib. n. 26.
1 Horn. 10 in Ep. ad Rom. ib, n, 27. pp, 143—145, ed, Field.
94 S. Augustine's summary of those before him ;
the sin of one slew all, much more shall the grace also of One
be able to save. Afterwards he showed that not that sin only
was destroyed through grace, but all the rest too, and not only
were sins destroyed, but righteousness too was given ; and
Christ not only benefited as much as Adam injured, but much
more and greater."
Some of these statements might perhaps have
seemed less forceful than others. But S. Augustine
sums them up, as all, together with others which
I have not quoted, attesting the same doctrine of
the transmission of original sin through that con-
cupiscence which is inseparable from the law of our
hirth.
" 9 In behalf of which Catholic truth the holy and blessed
Bishops, most eminent in the explanation of the Divine Scrip-
tures, Irena3us, Cyprian, E-eticius, Olympius, Hilary, Ambrose,
Gregory, Innocent [i.], John [S. Chrysostom], Basil, to whom,
will you nill you, I add the presbyter Jerome (to omit those
who have not yet fallen asleep), pronounce sentence against
you as to the succession of all mankind being subject to
original sin ; from which no one rescues, save He, Whom,
without any law of sin warring against the law of the mind, a
virgin conceived."
12. Pope Zosimus said, equally without limita-
tion :
" ' l The Lord is faithful in His words,' and His Baptism
maintaineth the same fulness in substance and in words, i. e. in
deed and confession and in true remission of sins, in every sex,
age, condition of the human race. For no one is made free, save
he who is a servant of sin ; nor can any one be said to have been
9 C. Pelag. Julian, ii. 10. n. 33.
1 In an Epistle quoted by S. Aug. Ep. 190 ad Opt. n. 23.
Zosimus, sin transmitted to all souls. 95
redeemed, save he who was before truly captive through sin, as
ifc is written, c If the Son shall set you free, ye shall be free
indeed.' For through Him we spiritually rise again ; through
Him we are crucified to the world. By His Death, that, by
propagation contracted, debt of death, which [death] was
brought in to us all by Adam, and transmitted to the soul
universally [universse animse], is cancelled, in which debt no
one whatever of those born is not held indebted, before he be
freed by baptism."
13. The occasion upon which S. Augustine quotes
this saying is remarkable. He feared, lest Optatus,
while asking whether each soul was new created by
God, or whether the soul, as well as the body, was
born through propagation and so derived from that
first soul of Adam, was or might be entangled in
the Pelagian heresy. For Pelagius had maintained
that it was u unjust, that a soul now born, not of
the mass of Adam, should bear so ancient a sin of
another's."
To this S. Augustine opposes the statement of
Zosimus, as expressing the old Catholic faith, " In
these words of the Apostolic See the Catholic faith,
so ancient and grounded, is clear and certain, so
that it were sin for any Christian to doubt it." He
himself leans to Traducianism, but leaves it an
open question, so that the truth of the transmission
of original sin through propagation be still main-
tained.
" 2 Since then through the Death of Christ that debt of death
is cancelled, which was contracted through propagation, not by
2 Ib. n. 24.
06 S. Augustine. One soul free from original sin.
one or some souls but by the soul universally 3, then, — if you
can maintain that souls are in such wise foreign to the propa-
gation, as yet, by rightest reason, to be shown to be bound by
that debt, which is to be cancelled by the Death of Christ
alone, and to appear justly bound, not by being themselves
propagated but by this debt of the flesh, — not only maintain
this, unhindered by any, but show us too how we may maintain
it with you."
But if the fresh creation of the soul could not be
maintained without falling into one or other heresy,
S. Augustine thought it better to leave its origin
as a thing unknown. One Soul, however, and One
only, S. Augustine formally excepts, whatever the
truth as to the origin of the soul might be.
" But that you, beloved, may hear from me too something
defined on this question, it is to be estimated as of no slight
moment, nay, it is of chief necessity and to be maintained, that
whatsoever be the origin of souls, whether they be propagated
from that one or from no other, it is not lawful to doubt that
the Soul 4 of the Mediator derived no sin from Adam. For if
no soul is propagated from another, when all are held bound by
the propagated flesh of sin, how much less is it to be believed
that His Soul could come from the propagation of a sinful
mother [or soul, peccatricis], "Whose Flesh came from a virgin,
conceived not by passion but by faith, so that It should be in
' the likeness of flesh of sin,' not in flesh of sin ! But if other
souls are therefore held bound by the sin of the first soul,
because they are propagated from it, That which the Only
Begotten fitted for Himself, either did not contract sin thence,
or was not derived from it at all. For He, Who loosed our
sins, could not but be able to derive to Himself a soul without
sin, or He, Who created a new soul for that flesh, which
s " Universse anirna>," Zosimus' words.
4 Animam. Animarum is an error, corrected in the edit.
Paris, 183G.
Force of the absence of any exception. 97
without a parent He rnade from the earth [Adam's], could not
but be able to create a new soul for that Flesh, which, without
aid of man, He took from a woman."
The omission of any mention of the B. V. here
is the more unaccountable, if S. Augustine had
believed her Immaculate Conception, because he is
arguing that even if our Lord's Soul was derived
from her soul [according to Traducianism], He
could still have exempted It somehow from the
transmission of sin; whereas, had he believed the
Blessed Virgin to have been immaculately con-
ceived, the exemption had already taken place in
her, and her soul, from which, on the supposed
hypothesis of Traducianism, His Soul would have
derived Its being, would have been already imma-
culate, so that there was already no sin, the trans-
mission of which was to be cut off.
As S. Augustine is so often quoted by the later
writers, their sayings will be clearer if I set down
at length some chief passages of his. Some are
given in brief by Biel, as against what he held
himself ; but controversialists seem so commonly to
think that a quotation begins too late or ends too
soon, that it is as well to have them with a fuller
context, when the context has more on the same
subject. The citations are from writings spread
over eighteen years of S. Augustine's life, from
that which he wrote A.D. 412, soon after the ap-
pearance of Pelagian ism 5, until his warfare was
5 The " De peccatorum meritis et remissione." S. Augustine
98 Force of S. Augustine's uniform statements
accomplished, A.D. 430, and his last work was left
unfinished. There is in them the remarkable
uniformity of statement so often observable in S.
Augustine. Repeated at such intervals of time,
they show his deliberate, unqualified conviction.
Concupiscence, the sin of our first parents, is, in
his belief, the instrument of transmitting original
sin G ; where it is present in the production of the
offspring (as it is in every conception except in
the one virgin-birth of our Lord), there it is
transmitted to the child. It was fitting that our
Lord should be exempt from it also ; therefore He
willed not so to be conceived. The Scriptural note
which runs throughout is that phrase of Holy
Scripture, which occurred in S. Irenseus too, as
the characteristic of our Lord, that He came " in
the likeness of sinful flesh."
" 7 The "Word, Which was made Flesh, was in the beginning,
and was G-od with God. But His very participation of our lower
nature, in order that ours might participate of His Higher,
held a sort of mediety even in the birth of the flesh, in that we
speaks of it as his first work against the new Pelagian heresy
(Retract, ii. 23). He had preached sermons against it earlier.
Eut the De bapt. Parv. Serm. 294, was preached A.D. 413.
Eened. note, ibid.
6 Agnosce vitium, unde trahitur originale peccatum. Op.
Imp. c. Jul. ii. 122. " The question is now, not as to the
nature of the seed but of the fault : for the nature has God
for its Author; but from the fault original sin is derived." De
nupt. et concep. ii. 8, n. 20.
7 De Pecc. mer. et rem. ii. 24. n. 38. T. x. pp. 60, 61. Beii.
through eighteen years. 99
were Dorn in the flesh of sin, but He ' in the likeness of flesh of
sin;' we, not only of flesh and blood, but also of the will of man
and the will of the flesh ; but He was born, only of flesh and
blood, not ' of the will of man, nor of the will of the flesh, but of
God.' And therefore we went to death for sin ; He went to
death for us without sin. — He then Alone, even when made
Man, abiding God, never had any sin, nor took- flesh of sin,
although from His mother's flesh of sin. For what of flesh He
took from her, He cleansed it, either when He was about to
take it, or by taking it V
" 9 Levi was there [in the loins of Abraham] according to that
' ratio seminalis,' whereby he was through concumbency to pass
into his mother ; in which manner the Flesh of Christ was not
there, although, according to it, the flesh of Mary was there.
"Wherefore neither Levi nor Christ were in the loins of Abra-
ham according to the soul ; but according to the flesh both
Levi and Christ ; yet Levi, according to carnal concupiscence,
but Christ, according to the bodily substance alone. For since
there is in the seed both visible corpulency and an invisible
mode, both continued on from Abraham, nay, from Adam him-
self to the body of Mary, because it too was conceived and had
its origin in that manner. But Christ took the visible sub-
stance of flesh from the flesh of the Virgin, yet the mode
of His Conception was not from human seed, but it came far
differently and from above."
" * And what more undefiled than that womb of the Virgin,
whose flesh, although it came from the layer of sin, yet did not
conceive from the layer of sin, so that that law, which, being in
the members of the body of death, warreth against the law of
the mind, should not have sowed even the Body of Christ Him-
self in the womb of Mary. — Accordingly the Body of Christ,
although It was taken from the flesh of a woman who had been
conceived from that layer of the flesh of sin, yet, because It
8 " Aut suscipiendum mundavit, aut suscipiendo nmndavit."
9 De Gen. ad litt. x. 20. n. 35. T. 3. p. 270.
1 Ib. 18. n. 32. pp. 268, 269.
G 2
100 S. Aug., Mary from Adam died for sin;
was not so conceived in her as she had been conceived, neither
was It flesh of sin, but ' likeness of flesh of sin.' "
" " Perhaps he calls the mortality of His flesh sackcloth.
Why sackcloth ? On account of ' the likeness of the flesh of
sin.' For the Apostle says, ' God sent His Son into the like-
ness of flesh of sin, that from sin He might condemn sin in the
flesh.' — Not that there was sin, I say not in the Word of God,
but neither, I say, in that Holy Soul and Mind itself of that
Man Whom the Word and Wisdom of God had co-aptated to
unity of Person with Himself: but neither, again, in that Body
Itself was there any sin ; but the ' likeness of the flesh of sin '
there was in the Lord; for death is not, save from sin, and
that Body was in truth mortal. Tor unless It were mortal, It
would not die ; if It died not, It would not rise again ; if It
did not rise again, It would not show us an example of eternal
life. So then death, which is caused by sin, is called sin, as,
by ' the Greek tongue,' ' the Latin tongue,' we mean, not the
member of the body, but what is done by the member of the
body. — So then, sin of the Lord is what is made from sin,
because He took flesh thence, from that very mass which had
deserved death for sin. Por, to speak more concisely, Mary from
Adam died on account of sin ; Adam died on account of sin, and
the Flesh of the Lord from Mary died for the effacing of
sins.'*
" 3 Lo, whence original sin is derived (Gen. iii. 7); lo, whence
no one is born without sin. Lo, why the Lord did not wilj so
to be conceived, Whom a Virgin conceived. He loosed it, who
came without it; He loosed it, Who did not come from
it."
" 4 Christ hath no sin; He neither derived original sin, nor
added of His own. He came, apart from the pleasure of carnal
passion ; no marital embrace was there ; from the body of the
Virgin He assumed not a wound, but a medicament ; He
- On Ps. 34. Serm. 2. n. 3. T. iv. 239, 240.
3 Serm. 151. n. 5. p. 720.
4 Serm. 294, De bapt. parv. n. 11, p. T. y. 1188.
Jesus Alone innocent, as born of a virgin. 101
assumed, not what He should heal, but whence He should heal.
I speak as pertains to sin. He then Alone was without sin."
" 5 Adam first received the bite of the serpent with poison.
Therefore (man) born in flesh of sin, is saved in Christ through
' likeness of flesh of sin.' * For God sent His Son,' not in
flesh of sin, but, as it follows, 'in likeness of flesh of sin/
because He came not from marital embrace, but from the
Virgin's womb. — Not in the likeness of flesh, for It was true
Flesh, but ' in likeness of flesh of sin,' because It was mortal
flesh, without any sin whatsoever." " G The Apostle said, ' We
too were at one time by nature children of wrath.' We do
not accuse nature. God is the Author of nature. Nature was
formed good by God, but by evil will it was vitiated by the
serpent. Therefore what in Adam was of fault, not of nature,
to us who are propagated is now become of nature. From this
fault of nature, with which man is born, none frees, save He
Who was born without fault. From this flesh of sin none frees,
save He Who was born without sin by ' the likeness of flesh
of sin.' " " 7The Apostle, wishing to show that the mass of
the human race was poisoned from its origin, therefore set
down him, from whom we were born [Adam], not Jiim, whom
we imitated [Satan]. —Because, according to the layer of the
flesh, we were all in him [Adam] before we were born, we
were there, as in a parent, as in the root. So, that tree was
poisoned, in which we were."
"8The heretics [Pelagians] were not yet born, and they
were already pointed out. He [John Baptist] cried out against
them from the river, against whom he now cries out from the
Gospel. Jesus came ; and what saith he ? ' Behold the Lamb
of God.' If one innocent is a lamb, John too was a lamb.
Was not he too innocent ? But who is innocent ? How far
innocent ? All come from that layer, and from that graft, of
which David chants groaning, 'I was conceived in iniquity,
and in sins did my mother nourish me in the womb.' He then
6Ib.n.l3. °Ib. u. 14. rlb. n. 15.
8 In S. Job. Ev. Tract, iv. n. 10, T. iii, 2. pp. 31G; 317.
102 S. Aug., all flesh, except our Lords, infected
Alone was a Lamb, Who did not so come. For He was not
conceived in iniquity ; because He was not conceived of mor-
tality ; nor did His mother nourish Rim in sins in the womb,
Whom a Virgin conceived, a Virgin bore, because she by
faith conceived, and by faith she received. Therefore, ' Behold
the Lamb of God.' Jle hath not that layer from Adam ; He
took only flesh from Adam : He did not take to Him sin.
He Who did not take to Him sin from our mass, He it is, Who
taketh away our sin. ' Behold the Lamb of God ; behold Him
Who taketh away the sin of the world.' '
"'From this concupiscence of the flesh, which, although in
the regenerate it is no longer accounted as sin, yet doth not
happen to nature save from sin ; from this concupiscence of
the flesh, I say, as the daughter of sin, — whatsoever flesh is
born, is bound by original sin, unless it be re-born in Him,
Whom, without that concupiscence, a virgin conceived ; where-
fore, when He vouchsafed to be born in the flesh, He Alone
was born without sin."
" l The Pelagian seems to confess that ' Christ came in the
flesh,' but, sifted, he is found to deny it. For Christ came in
flesh, which was 'the likeness of flesh of sin,' but was not
'flesh of sin.' The Apostle's words are, ' God sent His Son in
the likeness of flesh of sin ;' not ' in the likeness of flesh of sin,'
as though the flesh were not flesh, but, because it was flesh,
yet was not flesh of sin. But this Pelagius essays to set all
other flesh of every infant on a par with the Flesh of Christ.
It is not so, Best-beloved. For ' the likeness of the flesh of
sin' would not be set forth as a great thing in Christ, unless all
other flesh were flesh of sin."
" 2 Why toilest thou, by great argumentations, to reach the
precipice of impiety, that ' the Flesh of Christ, because He was
born of Mary, the flesh of which Virgin, like that of all the
rest, had been propagated from Adam, differs nothing from the
• De nupt. et concup. i. 24. n. 27. T. x. 294.
1 Serm. 183. c. 8. T. 5. p. 877. B.
2 C. Julian. Pel. v. 15. n. 52. z. G54.
through mode of our conception. 103
flesh of sin. and the Apostle is believed to have said without
any distinction, that He was sent in the likeness of the flesh
of sin ?' yea rather, thou urgest, ' that there is no flesh of sin,
lest Christ's too should be such.' What then is ' likeness of
flesh of sin,' if there is no ' flesh of sin ?' Thou sayest that ' I
did not understand this sentence of the Apostle,' yet didst not
thyself explain it, that we might learn from thee, that a thing
can be like another thing, which itself is not. Bat if this is
senseless, and the Flesh of Christ is, without doubt, not ' flesh
of sin,' but ' like to flesh of sin,' what remains for us to under-
stand, but that, It excepted, all other human flesh is ' flesh of
sin ?' And hence it appears that that concupiscence, whereby
Christ would not be conceived, caused in the human race the
propagation of evil, because the body of Mary, although derived
thence, did not transmit it to the Body, Which she did not
thence conceive. But whosoever denies that the Body of Christ
was said to be * in the likeness of the flesh of sin,' because all
other flesh of men is 'flesh of sin,' and compares the Flesh of
Christ with that of other men who are born, so as to assert that
both are of equal purity, is found to be a detestable heretic."
"3But, as relates to the passing of original sin to all men,
since it passes through concupiscence of the flesh, it could not
pass into that Flesh, which the Virgin did notconceive throughit."
Then he blames Julian, that he had quoted imperfectly words
of his4 " that Adam infected all who should come of his stock,"
whereas he had said, " by the hidden infection of carnal concupis-
cence he infected in himself all who should come of his stock."
He did not then infect that Flesh, in Whose Conception that
infection was not. The Flesh then of Christ derived mortality
from the mortality of His Mother's body, because He found
her body mortal. He did not derive the contagion of original
sin, because He did not find the concupiscence of one having
intercourse. But if He had not taken even mortality, but only
the substance of flesh from His mother, not only could not His
3 Ib. n. 54. p. 655.
4 From the De pecc. mer. et rem. i. 0. n. 10. T. x. p. 7.
104 S. Aug. All inherit sinful nature
Flesh, not have been flesh of sin, but not even ' the likeness of
flesh of sin.'"
"5 The Nature of the Man Christ was not unlike our nature,
but was unlike our fault. For He was born Man without
fault, which none of mankind was."
" 6 God created man upright, being the Author of natures,
5 Ib. n. 57. p. 656.
c De Civ. Dei, xiii. 14. Other passages are de Trin. xiii. 12.
n. 16. Opp. viii. pp. 937, 938, " The sin of the first man, pass-
ing to all born of the union of the two sexes by reason of their
origin [originaliter] and the debt of the first parents binding
all their posterity." Ep. 187 (lib. ad Dard.), n. 31. Opp. ii.
688, " Christ willed not that His Flesh should come through
such concurrence of male and female; but, from a Virgin, who
desired nothing of such sort in His Conception, He took for
us ' the likeness of flesh of sin,' whereby the flesh of sin should
be cleansed in us. 'For as through the offence of one,' saith
the Apostle, c unto all men to condemnation, so through the
justification of One to all men unto justification of life.' For
no one is born without carnal concupiscence operating, which is
derived from the first man, Adam ; and no one is re-born without
spiritual grace operating, which is given through the second
Man, Who is Christ. Wherefore, if we belong to Adam by
birth, to Christ by re-birth, and no one can be re-born before
he is born ; then He was born in a peculiar way, Who had no
need to be re-born, because He passed not from sin, in which
He never was, nor 'was He conceived in iniquity, nor did His
mother in the womb nourish Him in sins,' because ' the Holy
Ghost came upon her, and the virtue of the Highest over-
shadowed her, wherefore the Holy Thing which was born of her,
is called the Son of God.' " The like contrast is in the Enchi-
ridion (after A.D. 421). Of us, he says (c. 26. Opp. vi. 206),
" [Adarn] after his sin being made an exile, his own race also,
which by sinning he had vitiated in himself, as in its root, ho
bound by the punishment of death and condemnation ; so that
whatever progeny should be born of himself and his wife,
through whom he had sinned and who was with him con-
from Adam, through mode of their birtli. 105
not of vices ; but man, of his own will depraved and justly con-
demned, generated men depraved and condemned. For we were
all in that one, when we all were that one, who fell into
sin through the woman, who was made from him before sin.
For not as yet was that form, in which we should, each of us,
live, created and distributed to us individually ; but there was
already that seminal nature, from which we should be propa-
gated ; the which being vitiated on account of sin, and being
bound by the bond of death and justly condemned, man should
be born of man not of another condition."
He uses the same language in that unfinished
work, from the midst of which he was translated
to his reward 7, his reply to Julian's insolent attack
on his work, " De nuptiis et concupiscentia." His
immediate subject is, the "great and ineffable" mys-
tery, "penetrable by no understanding, compre-
hended by no thought," of "the natural laws of
propagation." By these, according to the Scripture
illustration of Levi paying tithes in Abraham,
each man was in his forefathers, but Jesus was ex-
cepted from the laws consequent thereon, by reason
of His Virgin-Birth.
demned, by carnal concupiscence, wherein was repaid a punish-
ment like to the disobedience, should derive original sin."
But of our Lord he says, " It is not lawful to say that any
thing of human nature was wanting in that assumption, but
of nature every way free from every bond of sin ; not such as
it is born from both sexes, through concupiscence of the flesh,
with the bond of sin, the guilt whereof is washed away by re-
generation, but such as it was fitting that He should be born
of a virgin, Whom the faith of His mother, not passion, had
conceived." Ib. c. 34. p. 209. See also on Psal. 1. n. 10. p. 467.
7 Prosper, Chron. A. 438.
106 S. Aug. The condition of Mary's birth
" 8 But if it be asked, how Christ was not decimated, since He
too, it is plain, according to the origin of His Flesh, was in the
loins of Abraham, when that father was decimated to Melchisedek,
nothing else occurs, save that Mary, His mother, of whom He
took flesh, was born of the carnal concupiscence of parents, but
not so did she conceive Christ, Whom she conceived not from
human seed, but from the Holy Ghost. He then did not ap-
pertain to that relation of seed of man, through which they
were in the loins of Abraham, whom Holy Scripture attests to
have been decimated in him." — " Concupiscence of the flesh —
there either was not in Adam before he sinned, or it was vitiated
in him through sin. — Either then it is itself fault, if there was
none before sin, or itself was, without doubt, vitiated by sin ;
and therefore original sin is derived from it. There was then
in the body of Mary the fleshly matter, whence Christ took flesh,
but carnal concupiscence did not sow Christ in her. Whence
He was born of flesh, with flesh, yet in 'the likeness of flesh of
sin,' not, as other men, in flesh of sin, wherefore He dissolved
original sin in others by regeneration, He did not Himself
contract it by generation. Therefore the one was the first
Adam, Christ was the second ; for the first was made, the second
was born, without concupiscence of the flesh ; but the first was
only man, the second was both God and Man : and therefore
the first could not-sin [i. e. could keep from sin], not, like the
Second, could-not sin [i. e. was incapable of sinning]."
S. Augustine's answer to Julian's insolent con-
trast of him with Jovinian in this same work, im-
plies the same belief. Julian had said, in the
course of a series of contrasts between him and
the heretic Jovinian, giving the preference to Jo-
vinian,
" 9 He undid the virginity of Mary, by the condition of her
child-bearing ; thou transferrest Mary herself to the devil by
the condition of birth."
8 Op. Imp. c. Julian, vi. 22. • Ib. iv. 122.
dissolved by re-birth. Per rone on S. Aug. 107
S. Augustine denies this;
" We do not transfer Mary to the devil by the condition of
birth ; but on this ground, that the condition of birth is dis-
solved by the grace of re-birth."
S. Augustine does not even give a special answer
to the charge. He gives one answer which applies
to all Christians ; the ill condition of hirth is un-
done by the grace of re-birth. This is true of
each of us through Holy Baptism. S. Augustine
does not say that the condition of Mary's birth was
different from that of others : he only says that it
was undone. But if it was undone, then it was
there, to be undone. This seems to me to lie in
S. Augustine's own words, "but on this ground " He
does not deny that such was the result of the con-
dition under which the Blessed Virgin received her
existence; but he says, that it was healed. And
the force of his words implies that it was healed by
an act subsequent to the reception of her existence.
In her too, " the condition of birth was dissolved
by the grace of re-birth." To be re-born implies
having been previously born.
Pen-one's comment on the three first of these
passages is,
" ' From which texts it is plain to any one who is not carried
away by a spirit of party, that the holy Doctor taught that
Christ Alone was to be exempted from the universal contagion
of sin; but that the Blessed Virgin, as having derived her being
from the ordinary generation of both parents, contracted the
1 1. c. pp. 58, 59.
108 Weight of the fact, that such manifold minds
common stain, and that her flesh was from sin and was flesh of
sin, which (flesh) Christ cleansed, either when about to take it,
or by taking it."
I gave the above authorities, mostly as grouped
together by S. Augustine. Perhaps it will be best
to add some others of the same period, lest this
writing should fall into other hands than those for
whom it is intended, and they might think the evi-
dence of the belief in the transmission of original
sin less strong than it is. At the same time, the
multiplicity of minds who hold the same language,
as to the universality of original sin, and that,
alleging the mode of our birth as the ground of
that universality, or making the exception of our
Lord Alone, seems to me the more to evince the
absence of any tradition that there was any other
exception besides our Lord, or that any one born
according to the law of our birth was excepted.
14. S. Clement of Alexandria 2 [2nd Cent.] con-
trasts man's innate sinful ness with the single excep-
tion of our Lord.
" 3 For the Word Himself Alone is without sin ; for to sin is
a thing innate (e/^vrov) and common " [to all].
2 This and the eight following are quoted by Klee, Dogmatik
ii. 330— 3a6. Of the Immaculate Conception of the B. V., he
said, " Has there not been only a single exception, viz. of the
Holy Virgin, and that in honour of her Son ? Did she not by
a very special grace remain untouched by original sin ? This
question has no doctrinal quality [A.D. 1839], but there are
many, and there is much, for the affirmative." Ib. 347, 348.
3 Peed. iii. 12. T. i. p. 307. Pott.
excelled no ordinary conception from orig. sin. 109
In another place, in answer to Cassian, who, as a
leader of the Docetse, condemned marriage, he
assumes as agreed, that all lay under the common
sentence from Adam, but, since there was this evil
in all, before actual sin, he says, as an " argu-
mentum ad hominem," that if, on account of this
inborn evil, they condemned marriage as giving
birth to the body, they must condemn the origin
of the soul too (which they did not), since it was
more in fault4.
15. Eusebius of Csesarea confessed this. He
says, on the words, " In sin did my mother conceive
me:"
"5Like to these words are those in Job, ' Cursed the day in
which I was born, and the night wherein they said, Lo, a man
child!' For wherefore was it ' cursed,' but that he was con-
ceived in iniquities ? For it was consequent, that curse should
follow sin. Jeremiah used the like words, ' Cursed the day in
which I was born, and the night in which my mother con-
ceived me.' For it had been blessed, that neither should the
4 " Let them tell when the child just born fornicated; or how
did it, who had worked nothing, fall under the curse of Adam.
It is left to them, as it seems, to say consistently that the birth
was evil, not of the body only, but of the soul also, for the
sake of which is the body also. And when David says 'I was con-
ceived in sins, and in transgressions was my mother pregnant
of me,' he, as a prophet, calls Eve mother. But Eve was the
mother of the living; and if he was conceived in sins, yet he
was not himself in sin, nor was he himself sin. — He does not
accuse Him Who said ' Increase and multiply ;' but the first
impulses, from our birth according to which we know not God,
he calls ungodliness." Strom, iii. 16. T. i. pp. 556, 557. Pott.
5 Comm. in Psalm 1. in Montf. Coll. Nova, i. 211.
110 S. Ath., " Our Lord's Flesh first liberated."
first woman, transgressing the commandment, have ministered
to the corrupt birth, but should remain in paradise, likened to
the angels. * But through envy of the devil death came into
the world.' But the birth through flesh and blood ministered
to death for the abiding of the mortal race."
16. S. Athanasius seems to me to explain S.
Paul's words, "First-born of many brethren," to
mean this, that our Lord's Flesh was first exempted
from the effects of 'Adam's transgression, and, being
united with the Word, became a principle of life
and holiness. In a writer so accurate as S. Atha-
nasius, I cannot but think that the words that
" our Lord's Flesh was saved and liberated " must
mean, that It was " saved " from that which he
had just spoken of, the evil inherited from Adam's
transgression, and was first " liberated " from that
condition to which it ha.d hitherto been subject, and
so in her too from whom It was taken.
" 6 When He put on a created nature, and became like us in
body, reasonably was He therefore called both our Brother
and ' First-born.' For though it was after us that He was
made man for us, and our brother by similitude of body, still
He is therefore called and is the ' First-born ' of us ; because,
all men being lost according to the transgression of Adam, His
Flesh "before all others was saved and liberated, as being the
Lord's Body, and henceforth we, becoming incorporate with It,
are saved after His pattern."
17. Didymus of Alexandria, who lived almost
throughout the fourth century, mentions the vir-
gin-birth as the ground of our Lord's being freo
6 C. Arian. Orat. ii. § 61. pp. 367, 368. Oxf. Tr.
Didymus i S. Macarius. Ill
from original sin, to which all besides are subject,
and that, in controversy with Manichees.
" 7 What he [S. Paul in those words, ' the likeness of sinful
flesh '] says, is of this sort : The flesh of all men hath its being
from fleshly union, except the Protoplast, and He whom the
Saviour took. For otherwise it would not be the body of a
man, except by union of male and female. Since then the
Saviour took from the Virgin alone a Body, not having its
origin from intercourse, he called the Flesh of the Lord, ' the
likeness of the flesh ' which is from intercourse. For he did
not say simply that He had ' the likeness of flesh,' but * the
likeness of flesh of sin.' But ' the likeness of flesh of sin ' is
flesh, differing from other flesh in this alone, that It had Its
being without man. But if He had taken a body through
fleshly union, not having that which is different, He too would
have been held to have been under sentence of that sin, to
which we all, who are from Adam, have been subject through
succession."
Of us, he says, , ,. ...
" 8 We are all born under sin, since the origin itself is in
fault."
18. S. Macarius, of Egypt, a contemporary of S.
Athanasius, in strong terms declares the hereditary
defilement of the whole human race, as derived
from the sin of Adam.
" 9 For there is a certain hidden defilement and overflowing
darkness of passions, which, contrary to the pure nature of
man, through the transgression of Adam, secretly invaded the
whole of humanity, and thus muddies and defiles both body
and soul."
7 C. Manich. n. 8. Gall. vi. 312.
8 On 1 John v. 19, Latin, Ib. p. 304.
9 De pat. et discr. n, 9. Gall. vii. p. 182.
112 Mark the Eremite ; S. Greg. Nyss.
" 1 Satan, tossing souls and sifting through a sieve, i. e.
through earthly things, the whole sinful race of men, from the
fall of Adam, who transgressed the commandment and came
under the ruler of wickedness," &c.
" 2 For as from one man, Adam, the whole race of men was
spread over the earth, so one vice of passions invaded the whole
sinful race of men."
19. Mark the Hermit (throughout the fourth
century, if the same as Mark Ascetes, else early in
the fifth century) puts down as a ground of repent-
ance, that if (which is impossible) any were kept
from even lesser sins, still all are under original sin.
" 3 Let us assume that some were found free from these
things too [lesser faults], and, from birth, alien from all vice
(which indeed is impossible, since Paul saith, ' all have
sinned and come short of the glory of God, being justified
freely by His grace '), yet even if they were such, still they
derive their origin from Adam, and all have come under the
sin of the transgression, and therefore have been condemned to
the sentenced death, and cannot be saved out of Christ. But
Christ having been crucified, and purchasing all therefrom by
His own Blood, then are they too redeemed. Then He Himself
too, the Redeemer, lays down one all-comprehensive rule for all,
and says to the Apostles, * Say to them, Repent ; for the king-
dom of heaven is at hand.' "
20. S. Gregory of Nyssa. A.D. 370, connects the
holiness of our Lord's Human Nature with the
Birth of a Virgin :
" * For He Alone, ineffably conceived, and unexplainably
borne in the womb, opened the virgin womb, not having been
before opened by marriage, guarding the tokens of virginity
1 Horn. V. 11. 1. Ib. p. 22. - Ib. n. 3. p. 23.
u Opusc. iii. de Poenit. n. 10. Gall. viii. 34.
4 De occursu Dom. Opp. T. i. pp. 448, 449. Mor.
All, save Christ^ conceived in sin. 113
unimpaired after His miraculous going forth also, and He
Alone is believed to be spiritually a male child, contracting
nothing of the female sin, whence He is also indeed worthily
called Holy ; as Gabriel too, bearing to the Deipara the tidings
of the life-giving Birth, as it were reminding her of that legis-
lation, which was fore-ordained concerning Him and regarded
Him Alone, said, c Wherefore also that Holy Thing which is
born of thee shall be called the Son of God,' in that the title
of * Holy ' properly befitted Him Who opened the virgin womb
by that Divine miraculous agency."
The immediate subject is the " illsesa virginitas ;"
but S. Gregory connects this too with the Concep-
tion of a Virgin, and his words go beyond the oc-
casion ;
" In regard to other first-born, Evangelic accuracy, espying
guardedly into the depth of the law, directed that they should
be called ' holy,' as obtaining this title by being hallowed to
God ; but in the case of the Eirst-Begotten of all creation, the
Angel called 'Him Who was born, Holy,' as being properly so,
as, contemporaneously with His being born, showing, as the
prophet saith, that which was indeed holiness, by the rejection
of evil and the choice of good."
Our evil, like S. Augustine, he ascribes to the
passion which our first parents admitted, and which
they transmitted to us by the law of our birth :
" 5 For if any one were to consider the necessary passions of
the soul, he will deem the removal of the evils conjoined there-
with impracticable, impossible. Straight from passion our
origin begins, and through passion our growth advances, and
in passion our life endeth ; and, in a way, the evil is mixed up
with nature, through those who from the beginning admitted
willingly passion, those who, through the disobedience, brought
5 De beatitud. Or. 6. T. i. p. 817. Mor.
H
114 Transmission oforig. sin to all. " On Baptism"
the disease into their house. For as, in the succession of
animals, born each after its kind to those before them, the
nature is co-transmitted, so that that which cometh to be
is, according to the law of nature, the same as that from
which it is born, so man is born from man, empassioned from
empassioned, sinner from sinner. "Wherefore sin is in a
manner co-existent with those born, being co-engendered, and
co-augmenting, and co-terminating with the bound of life."
" 6 Eor man was conceived, as it were, in some womb of
error, through the evil seed, sitting in darkness and the shadow
of death."
21. I may as well add the ancient but unknown
author of the book on Baptism, which used to be
accounted S. Basil's. He only states the univer-
sality of our defilement by reason of our birth,
quoting the same texts, which were quoted in later
times in proof that there was no exception :
" 7 That word ' anew ' (S. John iii. 3) shows, I suppose, tie
repairing of the former birth in the defilement of sins ; in that
Job says that ' no one is clean from sin, not if his life be of one
day,' and David, mourning and saying, 'I was conceived in
iniquities, and in sins did my mother conceive me,' and the
Apostle protesting that ' all have sinned and come short of the
glory of God,' &c. Wherefore remission of sins is given to
them that believe, as the Lord Himself says (Matt. xxvi. 28),
as the Apostle again attests (Eph. i. 5), that as a statue,
crushed and broken, and having lost the glorious form of the
king, is anew formed by the wise workman and good maker,
exerting himself for the glory of his work, and restoring it to
its ancient splendour, so we too, having suffered on account of
their disobedience of the commandment (according to Ps.
xlviii. 13), might be recalled to the first glory of the image of
God."
0 De eo, quid sit, ad imag. dei, ii. 29. Mor,
7 L. i. n. 7, App. Opp. S. Basil, ii. 634.
in S. Basil ; S. Parian ; S. Paulinus. 115
22. In the Western Church, S. Pacian, early in
the fourth century, states, without exception, save
of Christ, that the sin of Adam passed to all his
posterity, hy reason of their birth of him.
" 8 The sin of Adam had passed upon the whole race. * For
by one man (as saith the Apostle) sin entered into the world,
and death by sin, and so death passed upon all men.' There-
fore also the righteousness of Christ must needs pass over to
the whole race, and, as Adam by sin destroyed the race, so
must Christ by righteousness give life to all His race. This
the Apostle urges (quoting Bom. v. 19. 21). But one says to
me, ' but the sin of Adam deservedly passed to his posterity,
because they were born of him, and are we then born of Christ,
that for His sake we should be saved ?' Do not think carnal
things: now ye shall see how we are born of Christ as a
parent."
23. S. Paulinus declares how Adam's sin was
transmitted to his whole race, and that, in special
reference to our conception, as spoken of in Psalm
li.;
" 9 Unhappy I, who, not even through the wood of the Cross,
have digested the poison of the injuring tree. For there
remains to me that forefather's poison from Adam, wherewith
the first father, transgressing, infected the universality of his
race," &c.
" ' For with more ground is that day to be mourned by me,
wherein, born into this world, I fell, a sinner, from the womb of
a sinful mother 2, conceived from rank iniquities, so that my
mother bore me, already guilty."
8 De Bapt. n. 6, 7. pp. 381, 382. Oxf. Tr.
9 Ep. 30, ad Sever, n. 2. p. 190. Paris, 1685.
1 in S. Felic. xiii, 178—182. Gall. viii. 227.
2 Peccatricis.
H 2
116 Universality oforig. sin, except in Christ.
24. The universality of our hereditary death is
mentioned also in the writer known as S. Zeno of
Verona :
"8 That envious accuser — kindled by detestable envy, seducing,
since he could not in his own, in another form, persuading to
the transgression of the commandment of God, through the
woman, miserably slew him ; and thenceforth, destroyed by a
hereditary condition, the whole human race uniformly pe-
rished."
25. S. Augustine's teaching was handed down,
not only directly by his own works or by those
whose minds he formed, but through the reproduc-
tion of his works in other forms. Cassiodorus
mentions a Catena on S. Paul formed out of S.
Augustine's writings by Peter, Abbot of the pro-
vince of Tripoli, who lived probably soon after
S. Augustine's decease, since Cassiodorus speaks
of the Abbot Peter's work in the past, and in some
uncertainty, as to the work 4. It adds, of course,
3 Tract, xii. n. 2.
4 " Peter, Abbot of the province of Tripoli, is related to have
annotated the Epistles of S. Paul by passages of the works of
the blessed Augustine, so as to express by the words of another
the hidden meaning of his own heart. These passages he so
fitted to each text, that you would rather think it done by the
pains of the Blessed Augustine himself" (Cass. de instit. div.
lit. c. 8, p. 544;). The doubt of Cassiodorus related to the
author, not to the work, which he describes, as one who had seen
it, and "hoped by the Grace of God to send a copy" to Rome.
De Bandelis' citations from Peter of Tripoli occur in the com-
mentary on S. Paul's Epistles in Bede (Opp. T. vi.), which
confirms the conjecture of Gamier (on Marius Mercator, p.
378) and Baronius (A. 562, xvi.) that the commentary ascribed
to Bede is the Abbot Peter's.
Cone. ; prayer as to her sanctif. at Rome. 255
in original sin, which is contracted in the infusion of the soul
(De Cons, Di. iv. c. 146 in gloss ii.), sanctification would not
have been necessary, as neither in Christ. And therefore the
Roman Church does not keep the feast of the Conception,
although it tolerates that it be held in some places, especi-
ally in England ; but it does not approve it. For what is per-
mitted is not approved (iv. d. c. 6 fin.), or that feast ought to
be referred to the sanctification of the Virgin, not to her Con-
ception, as was said. And so says the prayer, which is said in
this feast at Rome in S. Mary major, ' Deus, qui sanctificationem
Virginis,' &c., as I saw and heard when I preached there on
that sanctification, upon that feast of the Sanctification, which
takes place in December, fifteen days before the feast of the
Nativity.9 J?or this truth, maketh that of Solomon, Prov.
9 The passage is absolutely unquestionable. Turrecremata
quoted, not the one statement about the Church of St. Mary
Major, but the whole context from a MS. (for the work was
not published until six years after his death, A.D. 1468) ; and
De Alva, who quoted also the whole at length, found fault only
(as his way was) with minute details in Turrecremata's citation,
and says, " I have seen it in many libraries in MS." Further,
it occurred in the first edition of Alvarus' works, TJlm, 1474,
in the carefully revised edition, Lyons, 1517, and in that of
Venice, 1560 (as I have seen) . 1) It is no argument against this,
that in some 3 MSS. the words are omitted, since we have had
many instances, in which persons, bona fide, expunged on this
subject from MSS. what was not consonant with the current
belief. 2) "With regard to Alvarus' accuracy, it is to be
observed, that when he wrote his celebrated work, " De
Planctu Ecclesise," he was Penitentiary at the Court of Eome.
The work was revised only in Portugal and addressed to Card.
Gomez. Wading cites a statement of his as authentic, because
he was then " present in the Court." He is spoken of as " a
most celebrated Doctor of Spain, most known from that dis-
tinguished work of his, * De Planctu Ecclesise.' " If we were
to be called upon to disbelieve what such a man says that he
" saw and heard " in public worship, in which he was himself
256 Accuracy of statement of Alvarus Pelagius.
xxv. 4, ' Take away the rust from the silver, and a most
pure vessel shall go forth.' That most pure vessel was the
Virgin, which, the rust of original sin having been washed
away [abluta, probably ' taken away,' ablata], by sanctification
wrought in the womb, went forth most pure from the womb,
And Psalm xlv. [xlvi.] 5, 'The Most High sanctified His
tabernacle.' The Virgin Mary was that sanctified tabernacle of
God, according to Ecclus. xxiv. 8. ' And He Who created me
rested in my tabernacle.' Aug. makes for this in the sermon
the preacher, because it could not be found in any book, nearly
300 years afterwards, ear- and eye-witness would not count
for much. 3) In regard to the statement itself, it should be
observed, that Alvarus does not say that those at Borne called
" the Feast of the Conception of the B. V. " by the name, " the
Feast of the Sanctification." He himself calls it what he held
it to be. So far, then, the statement of De Alva, whom Perrone
quotes (De Iinm. B.V. Concept, c. xv. § 3. Pareri, p. 426), " that
in countless Breviaries or Missals, whether Roman or other, he
had not found any, in which the Feast of the Conception was
entitled 'the Feast of the Sanctification,'" is irrelevant.
Alvarus does not say that it was. "What Alvarus does allege
is, that there was in his time a collect, used at Home on the
Festival, beginning, " O God, Who the sanctification of the
Virgin," &c., where the word " Conception " would have stood
in later times. But there is nothing strange that the word
" Sanctification " should be obliterated. Nay, when ordered to
be disused, it would be obliterated of course. The later Car-
thusian statutes directed the word " Conception " to be substi-
tuted for that of " Sanctification." They would then, of neces-
sity, obliterate in their Breviaries a word which was to be
disused. But what is disused, speedily disappears. In despite
of the commonness of printing, the Latin ritual from which
Luther translated into German his first Baptismal office, has
long since entirely disappeared, and, with it, the original of the
2nd collect in our own service. It disappeared in a much shorter
time than that between the time of Alvarus and the search
made by direction of Paul V. See too Carthus. Stat. bel. p. 368.
Christ Alone without sin. S. Jer., Rufai. 119
Flesh of the Lord was cleansed by the Holy Spirit, that He
might be born in a Body, such as was Adam's before he sinned,
yet under that sentence alone, which was given on Adam"
[liability to death].
29. S. Jerome speaks of " sin " in general terms,
but affirms that Christ Alone was without it.
"4 Of Him [our Lord] that is written as His own, ' "Who
did no sin, neither was guile found in His mouth.' If I too
have this in common with Christ, what had He as His own
[proprium] ?"
" 5 We follow the authority of Scripture, that no man is
without sin, but that God shut up all under sin, that He might
have mercy upon all, save Him Alone, ' Who did no sin, neither
was guile found in His mouth.' "
" 6 1 grant that they [' countless persons '] are righteous,
but, ' altogether without sin,' I assent not. For ' without vice/
(in Greek Ka/aa,) I say that man can be; but 'sinless' (dm/ua'p-
T^TOS), I deny. For that belongs to. God Alone, and every
creature is subject to sin, and needs the mercy of God."
" 7 The elder age [in Nineveh] beginneth [deeds of repent-
ance] and reacheth to the younger, for 'no one is without sin, not
if his life be of one day,' and the years of his life easily counted.
For if the stars are not clean in the sight of God, how much
more a worm and decay, and those who are held bound by the
sin of offending Adam !"
30. Rufinus, as an explanation of Isaiah's pro-
phecy, " I have trodden the wine press alone," says,
" 8 For He Alone did no sin, and took away the sins [others
* sin'] of the world."
4 Ep. 133 ad Ctes. n. 8. T. i. p. 1029. Vail.
5 Ep. 121 ad Algas. c. 8. T. i. p. 868.
6 Dial. c. Pelag. L. 2. n. 4. T. ii. p. 730.
7 On Jon. iii. 5. Opp. vi. 417. Vail.
8 Comm. in Symb. Apost. n. 25. p, 88. Vail.
& Cyr. Al. — All mothers save B. V. conceived in sin.
31. S. Cyril of Alexandria, while rejecting, as
ungodly, the idea that the purification of the Blessed
Virgin after our Lord's Nativity had any personal
reference to the Blessed Virgin, states that all
women, except herself, bare in iniquity.
" 9 First we must inquire, about whom the words • for their
purification' are written. For if any one think that they re-
late to the holy Deipara, or the blessed Joseph, or the Lord, he
will be ungodly. For neither did Joseph know the Blessed
Virgin, nor did she conceive in iniquities, like the rest of
women, so that they offer for their own cleansing. But she
conceived without seed, and bare without corruption; but
where there is no intercourse of man and woman, no sleep nor
pleasure, no sexual union, what need of cleansing ? But neither
is it said of the Lord, the Undefiled and above all purity."
" * The first man then, Adam, having been taken captive, and
held unexpectedly by the handwriting of disobedience and the
snares of death, and having, moreover, fallen under sin by the
unholy designs of that wicked serpent, the beginner of evil, I
mean Satan, and the evil having taken possession of the whole
race of Adam," &c.
32. The adherence of Cassian, A,D. 424, is the
more remarkable, in that he was a semi-Pelagian.
He too is commenting on the same text of S. Paul
as S. Augustine;
" a How too shall that be taken, that the Apostle states that
He came ' in the likeness of the flesh of sin,' if we too can have
flesh, defiled by no pollution of sin ? For this too is stated as
9 S. Cyril on S. Luke, c. ii. in Mai Nova Bibl. Patr. T. ii.
pp. 133, 134.
1 c. Julian, viii. T. vi. 2. p. 278. Aub.
2 Collat. xxii. 11, 12. pp. 585, 586.
120
Cassian — Christ only, the Virgin-born, without sin.
something peculiar in Him, Who is Alone without sin. ' God
sent His Son into the likeness of flesh of sin,' because He,
receiving the true and entire substance of human flesh, is not
to be believed to have taken sin itself in it, but ' the likeness of
sin.' Eor likeness is not to be referred to the verity of the flesh
(as some heretics wrongly say), but to the image of sin. For
there was in Him true flesh, but without sin, — flesh like to sinful
flesh. Herein then that Man, Who was born of a Virgin, is
separated by a great distance from us all who are produced by
the commingling of the two sexes, that, whereas we all bear
not the likeness, but the reality of sin in the flesh, He took
not the reality but the likeness of sin, by assuming real flesh."
He had also just declared absolute sinlessness to
belong to Christ alone ;
" 3 We cannot deny that many are holy and righteous, but
there is great difference between one holy and one immaculate.
For it is one thing that any one should be holy, i. e. conse-
crated to the worship of God; another, to be without sin,
which belongs individually to the Majesty of our One Lord
Jesus Christ, of Whom the Apostle too pronounces as some-
thing chief and special, ' Who did no sin.' For he would have
ascribed to Him, as something incomparable and Divine, a very
poor praise and unworthy of His dignity, if we too could pass
life, unstained by any sin. Again, the Apostle to the Hebrews
says, ' We have not a High Priest, Who cannot be touched
with a feeling of our infirmities, but was tempted like as we
are (pro similitudine), without sin.' If then there can be that
communion of our earthly humility with that great and Divine
High Priest, that we too can be tempted without any offence
of sin, why did the Apostle look up to this as something alone
and singular, and detach His merit by so great a severance
from man ? By this exception alone then He is distinguished
from us all, that it is certain that we are tempted not without
sin, He was tempted without sin."
Ib. c. 9. p. 584.
121
122 Euseb. Gall., S. Peter Chrysol.
33. Eusebius of Gaul, who used to be called
Eusebius Emisenus, ascribes original sin in plain
terms to the Blessed Virgin;
" * The Beginner of all things has His beginning from thee,
and receives from thy body the Blood which was to be shed for
the life of the world ; and took from thee what He should pay
for thee also. Eor not even the Mother of the Redeemer was
free 5 from the bond of the primaeval sin. He Alone, although
born of an indebted6 [mother], is yet not held by the law of the
primeval debt."
34. S. Peter Chrysologus, A.D. 433, states the uni-
versality and the transmission of original sin, as
inherent in us, making no exception, except as to
our Lord.
" T Thou sayest, ' If I owe to my kind that I am born, do I
also to sin, that nature should make me guilty before [my own]
fault?' This thy question, the words of the Apostle answer,
4 De Nativ. Doin. Horn. 2. Bibl. Patr. T. v. p. 1 f. 545.
Col. 1618. T. vi. p. 621. Lugd. 1677. The sermon was
omitted in the Antwerp Editions, 1555, 1568, Alva notices.
5 Petau (de Inc. xiv. 2. 5) notices that, per se, " in herself,"
was inserted here in the editions, contrary to the old MSS.,
making the passage to imply the doctrine of the Immaculate
Conception, instead of contradicting it. It was not in
Turrecremata's MS.
6 Debitrice. This is the reading of Turrecremata's MS.
There is a trace of ifc in the reading of the editions, following
that of Gaigny, Paris, 1547, " debito renascatur," for " debitrica
nascaturj" renascatur, as applied to our Lord, having no
meaning. De Alva thinks it of moment, that there follows in
Eusebius, "Thou hast little in common with other mothers;"
but this relates to the Conception and Birth of our Lord.
7 Serm. 111.
Cone, in orig. sin, no ground agst. the Feast. 241
He holds that the Feast of the Conception
might still be fittingly held : —
" "We shall say that a thing is praiseworthy in an inferior,
which is not so in a superior. Eor in Christ it would not have
been praiseworthy to have been born in original sin, because He
was not conceived by marital embrace ; but in those who are so
conceived, because in this way they become members of Christ,
as freed from original sin by grace, although to be in original
sin is not in itself praiseworthy, yet it appertaineth to praise as
they become members of Christ. For one doth not become a
member of Christ otherwise than as he is freed from original
sin by Christ. "Whence also Aug. in the de Bapt. parv., setting
forth the likeness of the serpent lifted up in the wilderness as a
type of Christ, says, ' If innocency in your own case moves you,
deny not that guilt was contracted from the first parent."
114. f" Reginald, Franciscan, Archbishop of
Eouen ;" i.e. Odo Rigaldi. According to the Sam-
marthani 3, his holiness of life gained him the title
of "regula vivendi." He died A.D. 1275, or 1276.
" * As impurity, if it had not been sanctified, would derogate
from the Virgin herself, whose privilege it was that she alone
sine viro conceived (as Bernard says), and therefore did not
transmit original sin to her offspring, so if the virgin had been
conceived without original sin, it would have derogated from
her Son Himself."
115. fHugo Gallicus, an eminent Dominican,
Archbishop and Cardinal of Ostia.
3 Grail. Christ, xi. 7. They mention also his work on the
Sentences. See also on him, "Wading A. 1236. n. 6. A. 1276.
n. 5.
4 In 3. Sent. d. 3. Turr. P. 6. c. 30. f. 121. v. He wrote com-
mentaries on the Sentences, beginning, " Quseritur utrum plures
sint veritates ab asterno," &c. (Oudin. iii. 451), and so, different
from that of Eigaltus Diacon. beg. "Veteris et novae legis,"
which De Alva (n. 266. p. 711) alleged to be the same.
Q H-
242 John of Naples' answers
"6From the corruption of original sin the B. V. was
cleansed in her mother's womb, as relates to infection and
guilt, because she would still have descended into limbus, had
she departed before the Conception of the Son of God, from
the debt of original sin which was never fully purged before
the Coming of Christ. "Whence, at His Coming, being filled
with the grace of the Holy Spirit, she was altogether cleansed
from that corruption, and so was twice sanctified."
116. John of Naples, "Doctor solennis Parisi-
ensis," taught at Paris, A.D. 1315 ; died probably
A.D. 1330. "He had lived most holily, was re-
markable for his life, learning, eloquence6." S.
Antoninus quotes him several times in answer to
the arguments alleged for the Imm. Cone.7
He retorted the argument drawn from S.
AnselnVs saying, that it was meet that the B. V.
should have the highest purity beneath God, that
if the B. V. had not contracted original sin, her
purity would be, not beneath, but equal to that of
her Son, Who is God 8, adding, —
" Nor does the instance from the good Angels hold, for in
them there cannot be sin contracted from origination, but
all are created immediately by Grod."
To another argument from fittingness, he re-
torted,—
6 « In 3. Sent. d. 3." Turrecr. Part. 6. c. 29. fol. 118 v. The
writer cannot be identified. " Hugo Metensis " lectured on
the Sentences at the same time as S. Thorn. Aq. Bulaeus,
Hist. Univ. Par. iii. 216.
6 Quetif, i. 567.
7 Summa Theol. Tit. 8. c. 2. t. i, 551—554.
8 See ab. p. 166.
His Virgin-Birth alone, free from fault of all. 125
Lord of all things, He vouchsafed to be one of mortals, having
chosen to Himself the mother whom He had made, who, her
virginity entire, should only minister the bodily substance, so
that, the contagion of the human seed ceasing, there should be,
in the new Man, both purity and verity [of our nature]. — In
this Nativity was the word of Isaiah fulfilled, ' Let the earth
bud and bring forth a Saviour, and righteousness spring up
together.* For the earth of human flesh, which in the first
transgressor had been cursed, in this SirtJi Alone from the
Blessed Virgin yielded a blessed Fruit, and alien from the fault
of His race."
" 4 Unless the "Word of God had become Flesh and dwelt
among us, unless the Creator Himself had come down to
communion with His creatures, and by His Birth recalled
human decay to a new beginning, death would reign from Adam
to the end, and an insoluble condemnation would abide upon
all men, since, from the condition of birth alone, all would have
had one cause of perishing. Alone then among the sons of
men the Lord Jesus was born innocent, because He Alone was
born without the pollution of carnal concupiscence.'*
37. S. Prosper, A.D. 444, speaks of the univer-
sality of original sin, and our Lord as the single
exception from it.
" 5 Against the wound of original sin, whereby in Adam the
nature of all men was corrupted and subjected to death, and
whence the disease of all concupiscence ingrew, the true and
mighty and only remedy is the death of the Son of God, our
Lord Jesus Christ, Who, being free from the debt of death and
Alone without sin, died for sinners, debtors of death."
" • That men should be born, is the benefit of the Creator ;
that they should perish, is the merit of the transgressor. For
in Adam, in whom the nature of all men was pre-formed, all sin-
4 Serm. 5. de Nat. Dom. c. 5. p. 86.
5 Reap, ad cap. obj. Vincent, c. 1. p 130. Basil. 1783,
9 Ib. c. 3. p. 131.
126 Chrysippus, Antipater; B. V. too in sin.
ned ; and were bound by the same sentence, which he received.
Nor, even if they are without sins of their own, are they freed
from this bond, unless they be re-born through the Holy Ghost
in the Sacrament of the Death and Eesurrection of Christ."
38. Chrysippus, Presbyter of Jerusalem, A.D.
455, disciple of S. Euthymius,
"' 7 Arise, O Lord, into Thy rest.' For 'Thy rest/ he says
is the Virgin, and her womb. c Thy rest/ because it shall be
made to Thee a couch and a habitation. ' Arise, O Lord.' For
unless Thou arise from the Bosom of the Father, he saith, our
race, long fallen, will not rise again. 'Arise, O Lord;' for,
even if Thou arise, Thou shalt not be severed from the glory of
the Father, and, having come to us below, Thou shalt not quit
the heavens, and, appearing in the Flesh, Thou wilt not lessen
Thy ante-mundane might. ' Thou and the ark of Thy strength.'
For when Thou, having risen thence, shalt seal the ark of Thy
sanctification, then will the ark too [the B. V.] rise with all
out of that fall, in which the kindred of Eve set her too."
39. Antipater, Bishop of Bostra, A.D. 460, in a
sermon on the Annunciation, addresses the B. V.,
" 8 Hail, thou who, first and alone, bearest a child free from
r Serm. de laud. V. Marise. Bibl. PP. Gr. Lat. ii. 426. Paris,
1624.
8 In Ballerini Syll. Monumm. de Imm. B. Y. Cone. ii. 19.
The expressions to which Ball, draws attention on the other
side are, " What mother has persuaded God the Word to
dwell manifestly amongst us ? And who is this Virgin, who
appeared more valued by God than all the powers ? Who is it
that holdeth in her womb the Uncontainable F " (words put in
the mouth of S. JohnB. when he leaped in the womb), — n.2,
p. 6, — " in whom [i. e. woman] He, angered, cast out the first
father, in her, pitying. He sojourned." Ib. p, 8. " But the angel
said to her, ' Fear not, Mary, for thou hast found favour
(or grace) which the protoplast (woman) lost.' " n- 10, p. 20.
Vincent., Olympiad.; all in sin through birth. 127
40. Vincentius, Presbyter in Southern Gaul,.
A.D. 480 % a contemporary of Gennadius (partly
quoting from St. Augustine) ;
" J 'In sin did my mother conceive me,' my mother conceived
me with the delectation of sin. I, being conceived, drew with
me the iniquity of the original offence. "Was David born of
adultery, he who was born of Jesse, a just man, and his wife ?
"Why then does he say, that he was ' conceived in iniquities,'
save that iniquity is drawn from Adam ? No one is born, who
doth not draw [from him] fault and the punishment of fault.
His word ' behold ' signifies that it is manifest ; for all see it,
all feel it. Man, living in corruptible flesh, has the defilements
of 'temptations impressed upon himself, because he derived them
from his very origin, because, on account of the delectation of
the flesh, his conception is uncleanness."
41. Olympiodorus, an Alexandrian commentator,
about A.D. 501, speaks of the universality of original
sin, and that, as derived to us through the mode of
our birth.
" 2 The human production is not without defilement and sin,
whence also infants are baptized, washing away the defilement,
which is through the transgression of Adam. But he says
this, because nature is weakened through the transgression in
Adam, and is become very liable to slide into sin ; and this
indeed, on account of our production, which is from love of
pleasure, not as if sin had been co-essentiated with us, G-od
forbid!"
9 See Bened. Pref. to Bufinus, pp. xvi — xviii. Gennad. Virr.
111. n. 80.
1 Comm. in Ixxv. Dav. Ps. in App. Bufini, p. 255 on Ps.
50 (51), 7.
2 On Job xiv. 2, in MS. of Nicetas in Potter on S, Clem.
Strom. i!i. 16, T. i. p. 556. Oxon,
128 S. Gelasius, Encyclical Epistle.
. 42. S. Gelasius, A.D. 493, does not use S.
Augustine's term " concupiscence ; " in other re-
spects his teaching is the same, that our disordered
nature is transmitted by the law of our birth uni-
versally. In his encyclical letter to the Bishops
throughout Picenum, A.D. 493, remonstrating with
them for conniving at a Pelagian Bishop, he answers
the objection of those who accused God of injustice,
if children were held guilty of original sin.
" 3 This they put forth as the acutest argument for their
dogma, not observing that those first parents of the human
race, formed of no parents, but of the harmless matter of clay,
and compacted by Divine skill and power, pure and undefiled,
and made rational, following, of their own will, the devil their
seducer, were infected with perverse desires through the excess
of transgression. In whom human nature sinned and was
vitiated, receiving doubtless evil which before it had not known ;
revolting from good and right, it is plain by the course of
events itself, that it fell into the love of what was evil and
perverse. The first parents then of our nature, having become
such, rendered themselves passible and corruptible, violating so
far the gifts of the Divine Creator, as to be punished with
death. For there is no question but that they were (as) dead
on that day when they were made mortal. Accordingly what-
ever those parents produced of their stock, is indeed the work
of God, according to the institution of nature, but not with-
out the contagion of that evil which they derived through their
own transgression ; and as to this same infection of evil, it is
clearly certain, that it is not the work of God. Therefore
that fault, which nature gathered by its own voluntary motion,
is not from the creation of God; yet, even from nature,
vitiated by itself, God executeth the institution of His own
creation, but the creation produces fault, which it received not
3 Ep. vii. Cone. v. 302—4 Col.
Nature of all naturally born, defiled. 129
from the institution of the Creator, but which itself took to
itself through the fall of its transgression. For if those first
men, born of no parents and formed without any infection,
could deprave themselves by the ambition of an illicit presump-
tion, and join on the work of the fraud of the devil in the work
of God, what marvel, if they, being depraved, produced a
depraved offspring ? God formed the human substance free
by His creation ; but does not slavery, coming from without,
according to human laws, make it, by nature, bound and
enslaved ? By their origin, men are generated enslaved, and,
from a servile condition, they are produced slaves ; they become,
by law of their birth, slaves before they are born. If this can
be, in things which belong not to nature, how much less to be
wondered at is it, that it should result from those things,
whereby the human substance itself is known to be depraved.
And thereby as the human substance, having been created
pure, did, by the guilty will of reprobate acts, make itself
polluted, so did it yield the offspring and progeny of its nature
stained, from the guilty will of its acts, because it produced an
offspring of the same sort as it made itself by the excess of
transgression. And therefore it not only produces from
itself what God formed well, but also what itself, inconsistently
and ill, added. But how an interior quality of appetency can
change nature, is confirmed by the authority of Divine Scrip-
ture." Then, having adduced in illustration the history of
Jacob and the cattle (Gen. xxx.), he proceeds, " The Divine
testimonies and the very sacraments of the Church and the
tradition of Catholic Doctors from the Lord and Saviour
Himself, teach, that the beginnings of human generation are
polluted. Hence it is, that the prophet cries out, ' "Who shall
boast that he hath a clean heart, and that he is pure from sin ?
Not even an infant, whose life is of one day on the earth.'
Hence it is, that Holy Scripture also says, ' "Who can make
clean what is conceived from unclean seed ? is it not Thou, Who
art Alone ? ' and elsewhere, c Because it was a cursed seed ;'
and David too attests, ' I was conceived in iniquities, and in
sin did my mother bear me.' And if he says this, who should
assert that he was generated otherwise ? The blessed Paul too
says, ' AVe too were once by nature children of wrath, even as
130 Julian Pom.) Xt. alone born without sin.
the rest.'" Then, quoting S. John iii. 36, he adds, "That
wrath of which it is said, * thou shalt surely die.' The Lord
Jesus Christ Himself pronounces with a voice from heaven,
' Whoso eateth not the flesh of the Son of man, and drinketh
not His blood, shall not have life in him.' Where we see no one
is excepted, nor hath any one dared to say, that a little one
without this saving Sacrament can be brought fro eternal life.
"Whence, since he is held bound by no guilfc from his own act,
there remains nothing but that he is polluted by a vicious
nativity alone."
In his 4 sayings against the Pelagian heresy,
Pope S. Gelasius, beginning with the same text,
"No one is clean from defilement," instances
Saints of the Old Testament, and goes through
the chief Apostles, S. James, S. Peter, S. John,
who lay in the bosom of the Lord, S. Paul, to show
that no one is free from sin.
43. Julianus Pomerius, A.D. 498, after stating
that our first parents committed that so great sin,
which both cast themselves out of paradise into the
exile of this penal life, and in them, by virtue of
origin [originaliter], condemned the whole human
race5, says,
" 6 Adam subjected us to [obnoxiavit] all evils through his
own guilt, from which the Coming of Christ freed us through
grace. Adam transmitted to us his fault and punishment ;
Christ, "Who could not take our faults, in that He was conceived
and born without sin, through the taking of our punishment,
abolished at once our fault and punishment."
* Gelasii Pap® dicta adv. Pelag. ha3resin.Conc. v. 366—8. Col.
5 De Vita Contempl. ii. 19. ap, S. Prosper
0 Ib. c. 20
S. Fulg., Passion transmits sin to all. 131
44. Of S. Fulgentius of Ruspe, A.D. 504, Bielhas
already furnished two passages 7. In another place,
he, like others, assigns our Lord's Virgin-birth
and the consequent absence of concupiscence in His
Conception, as the ground of the exemption of His
sacred Flesh from original sin, whereas His blessed
Mother's, conceived in the natural way, was, he says,
"flesh of sin."
" 8 In what words shall the singular excellence of that Flesh
be expressed — whose original of birth is unwonted, whereby the
Word was so made Flesh, that the Only Begotten and Eternal
Q-od should, in one Person with His Flesh, be conceived by His
own conception of His own flesh ! For it is certain, that the
flesh of the rest of mankind is born through human concum-
bency. — And because, in that mutual commingling of man
and woman for the generation of children, the concumbency of
the parents is not without passion, therefore the conception of
the children, born from their flesh, cannot be without sin;
wherein not propagation, but passion transmits sin to the little
ones. Nor does fecundity of human nature cause men to be born
with sin ; but the foulness of passion, which men have from the
most just condemnation of that first sin. Therefore the blessed
David, although born of a lawful and righteous marriage, where-
in could be found neither fault of unfaithfulness nor stain of
fornication, yet on account of the original sin (whereby those
naturally bound are children of wrath, not only the children of the
ungodly, but all they too, who are born of the sanctified flesh
of the righteous) exclaims, * Behold I was conceived in iniqui-
ties,' &c. The Only Begotten Son of God then, AVho is in the
Bosom of the Father, that He might cleanse the flesh and soul
of man, was incarnate by taking the flesh and rational soul —
in order to take away that sin, which the generation of man con-
tracted in the concumbency of mortal flesh, was conceived in a
7 See above, pp. 65, 66.
8 De fide ad Pet. h. 16, 17. in S. Aug. App. T. vi. p. 22.
I 2
132 Letter from Easterns to S. Fulgentius
new manner, God incarnated in a Virgin Mother, without con-
gress of man, without passion of the conceiving Virgin, that so,
through God-Man, "Whom, being conceived without passion, the
uninjured womb of the Virgin bare, that sin might be washed
away, which all men, at their birth, drag [with them] ."
Some further statements were elicited by a formal
letter of some Easterns.
45. Peter the Deacon, Leontius, and others,
" being sent to Rome on a matter of faith " (the
formula of the Scythian monks, that " unus e Trini-
tate passus est"), wrote, A.D. 521, a confession
of their faith to S. Fulgentius and fourteen other
Bishops, in exile for their faith in Sardinia. They
say of Adam's sin, and its consequences ;
" • Death and immortality were placed in a manner in his
free will. For he had a capacity for either, that, if he should
keep the commandment, he should, without experience of
death, become immortal ; if he s"hould despise it, death should
forthwith follow. So then, depraved by the cunning of the
serpent, he, of free will, was made a transgressor of the Divine
law, and so, as had been foretold him, is condemned to the
penalty of death by the just judgment of God ; and, the whole
of him, i. e., in soul and body, being changed for the worse,
having lost his own liberty, is made over under the slavery
of sin. Thenceforth there is none of mankind, who is not born
bound by the bond of this sin, save He, Who was born by a
new kind of generation, to loose this bond of sin, * the Mediator
of God and men, the Man Christ Jesus.' For what else could
or can be born of a slave, but a slave ? For neither did Adam
beget children, when he was free, but after he was made 'a servant
of sin.' Therefore as every man is from him, so also every man
is a servant of sin through him. Hence too the Apostle says,
9 De Incarn. et grat. c. 6. in S. Fulg. Opp. pp. 282, 283.
Paris, 1684, and Gall, xi, 239.
and African confessors, and their response. 133
'From one to all men to condemnation.' And again, * By one
man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so
death passed upon all men, in whom all sinned.' They then
are altogether deceived who say, that death alone and not sin
also passed to the human race, since the Apostle attests, that
both sin and death were brought upon the world through him.
From this condemnation and death no one is freed except
through the grace of the Eedeemer," &c.
The formal answer to this letter from the fifteen
Bishops was written by S. Fulgentius, but was the
act of all ; S. Fulgentius, as being one of the young-
est, signing nearly the last. It agrees altogether
with the statement of Peter.
" l One was the Conception of the Divinity and the Flesh
in the womb of the Virgin Mary, and One is Christ the Son of
God, conceived in both natures, that He might begin to abolish
the stain of the vitiated stock thence, whence it seemed to have
its being in every one born. For since all men,, born from the
union of male and female, have the beginning of conception
itself aspersed with the contagion of original sin, because the
sin to which the first man, being by nature good but seduced
by the malignity of the devil, gave entrance, passed to his pos-
terity, together with the penalty, i. e. death, (which the holy
David enunciates in truth, saying, ' Behold I was conceived in
iniquities, and in sins did my mother bear me,') it was very ne-
cessary that the merciful and just Lord, when He would efface
the traces of human iniquity, should vouchsafe, Immaculate, to
unite to Himself human nature immaculate in the Conception
Itself, where the devil had been wont to claim it to his side and
dominion, through the stain of original sin inflicted ; of that
human nature, whose truth and fulness God the Only Begot-
ten willed to assume, He took also His Conception and
Nativity."
1 De Incaru. et grat. ad Petr, Diacou. <fcc. Ep. 17, c. iii. iv. n.
7, 8. p. 290. Paris, 1G84,
134 S. Fulg. 4-6-., Mary's flesh of sin.
" 2 That wonderful then but true Conception and Birth, ac-
cording to the flesh, of God-Man, — whereby the Virgin ineffably
conceived and bore the God of heaven, and remained an unim-
paired virgin mother, she who was truly called by the Angel
'full of grace,' and 'blessed among women,' had this [effect],
that by aid of preventing grace and by the work of ' the Holy
Ghost supervening in her, and the power of the Highest over-
shadowing her,' she, when she was to conceive God, the Son of
God, neither endured nor willed to have intercourse of man,
but, retaining virginity both of mind and body, received from
Him, Whom she was to conceive and bear, the gift of unim-
paired fruitfulness, and fruitful unirnpairedness."
" This is the grace, whereby it was wrought, that God, "Who
came to take away sin ' because in Him is no sin,' was conceived
Man, and was born ' in the likeness of flesh of sin,' from ' flesh
of sin.' For the flesh of Mary, which, after the manner of
men, had been 'conceived in iniquities,' was indeed 'flesh of sin,'
which bare the Son of God into ' the likeness of flesh of sin.'
For the Apostle attesteth, ' Because God sent His Son into the
likeness of flesh of sin,' Him, ' Who, being in the form of God,
thought it not robbery to be equal with God, but emptied Him-
self, taking the form of a servant.' But therefore was the Son
of God ' sent in the likeness of flesh of sin,' the Same, Who was
made ' in likeness of men,' that He might both be like unto men
in the truth of the flesh which He had Himself created, and that
He AVho was God, being created in the flesh without sin, might
take away our unlikeness, which He saw to be in our flesh, not
from His own work, but from our sin. The Son of God, then,
being sent, appeared in ' the likeness of the flesh of sin,' be-
cause in His true human Flesh there was not the iniquity of
man, but his mortality. But when ' the likeness of the flesh of
sin ' in the Son of God, or rather when the Son of God in ' the
likeness of the flesh of sin,' is spoken of, it is to be believed,
that the Only Begotten God did not derive from the mortal
flesh of the Virgin defilement of sin, but received the entire
verity of nature, that there might be that birth of Truth from
8 Ib. c. vi. vii. n. 12—14. pp. 292, 293.
Boethius; how cd.Xt.born of sinner s,be sinless? 135
the earth, which the Bl. David hints at in prophetic speech,
saying, 'Truth hath sprung out of the earth.' Truly then
Mary conceived God the "Word, Whom she bore in. flesh of sin,
which God received. But she obtained [promeruit] this, that
she should conceive and bear Himself, God made Man, not ly
any human merits, but by the vouchsafement of the most High
God, conceived and born of her. For unless God the "Word,
uniting to Himself individually human nature, were born, truly
and fully Man, of a Virgin, never would it be granted to us,
being carnally born, to be spiritually born of God ; but, that a
Divine nativity might be given to us being carnal, the Divine
majesty of the Only Begotten Son was first conceived and born
in the verity of flesh. For ' truth was far from sinners,' and
our iniquities had severed us by a great separation from God."
46. Boethius (A.D. 510) writes in a condensed
style, and leaves much to be supplied, as being
already known ; whence, the comment of Porree,
Bp. of Poitiers (A.D. 1125), is often little more than
a paraphrase, filling it out. His argument against
Eutyches presupposes the doctrine of the univer-
sality of original sin. At the close of his treatise
" on the Two Natures and One Person of Christ,"
he meets the question, how our Lord being born
of a race, all of whom were involved in the conse-
quences of the fall and of original sin, could, if He
really took flesh of Mary, be freed from them. His
answer is, in fact, that Christ took real Manhood,
but that, not being born according to the natural
laws, He took that Nature, as He willed, subject
to death and the sinless infirmities of our nature,
yet without sin. The question states the univer-
sality of the transmission of original sin, not ex-
136 Boetliius; Xt. took the nature, in us
cepting the Blessed Virgin, from whom our Lord
took His Human Body; the answer grants that
universality, referring the exception in the case of
our Blessed Lord to the freedom of His Divine
Will.
" 3 Another question may be put by those who do not believe
that the Human Body [of Christ] was taken from Mary ; but
that that was separated and prepared elsewhere, which in
adunation should seem to be generated and produced from the
womb of Mary. For they say, ' If the body was taken from
man, but every man was, from that first transgression, not only
held by sin and death, but was also entangled with the affections
of sins, and that was to him the punishment of sin, that, being
held bound by death, he should also be guilty through the will
to sin, why in Christ was there neither sin, nor any will of
sinning ? ' Such a question involves a doubt which has to be
noticed. For if the Body of Christ was taken from human
flesh, it may be doubted, what that flesh was, which was taken.
For He saved that man, whose nature He took. But if He
took man, such as Adam was before he sinned, He seems to
have taken human nature in its integrity, yet one which did
not at all need cure. But how could He take man, such as
Adam was, since in Adam there could be will and affection to
sin ? — But in Christ it is not believed that there was even any
will to sin. If too He took the body of man, such as Adam's
was before he sinned, He ought not to have been mortal. For
Adam, had he not sinned, would not have felt death. Since
then Christ did not sin, why did He feel death, if He took a
Body, as Adam's before he sinned ? But if He took a con-
dition of man, such as Adam was after he sinned, then, it
seems that Chris* ought not to have been free from being sub-
ject to transgressions, &c., since all these punishments Adam
drew on himself by transgression. Against whom we must
answer, that there are three possible states of man. One, that
3 De duab. Nat. et una Pers. Christi, L. iv. in Boethii Opp.
pp. 1217, 1218. c. 8. p. 321—3. Leyd, 1671.
subject to sin, mortal but sinless. 137
of Adam, before he sinned, in which although there was no
death, nor had he yet defiled himself with any sin, there might be
in him the will to sin. Another, whereto he might have been
changed, if he had willed to remain firm in the commands
of God. For then that would be to be added, that he not only
should not sin or will to sin, but neither could he either sin or
will to sin. The third is the state after the offence, wherein
both death necessarily overtook him and sin itself and the will
to sin. — Of these three states, Christ took into His bodily
Nature, in a manner, the causes of each. For that He took a
mortal Body, in order that He might chase death from the
human race, is to be set down in that state, which was penally
inflicted after the transgression of Adam. But that in Him
was no will of sin, was taken from that state, which might have
been, had not Adam given his will to the deceits of the tempter.
There remains the third, that is the middle, state, that which
existed at that time, when there was no death, yet the will to
sin could come. In this condition Adam was such as to eat,
drink, digest, fall asleep, and the like. All, things human but
allowed, which brought with them no penalty of death; all
which there is no question but that Christ had."
" Thus far," sums up his Commentator Porree *, " he divided
the conditions of Adam, or of those who were engendered
by the law of human generation, i. e. by the sin of original
concupiscence. Of all which he now proceeds to say that
there was something in Christ, Who took His Body from
sinners, yet not by the law of sin ; but nothing whatever of
them had He of necessity, to which the sin of their generation
consigns others, but all of His own will Alone."
47. Cassiodorus (A.D. 514) follows S. Augustine
as to the universal transmission of original sin, with
the single exception of our Lord, by reason of His
Virgin-Birth.
" 5 Some opine, that, as that Almighty Creator extracts the
4 Ib. p. 1272. 5 De anima, c. 7. ii. 633. Ben.
138 Cassiod. excepis Xt. Alone from orig. sin.
seed of flesh from our body, so also a new soul can be gene-
rated from the quality of the soul ; that so it may be shown,
by transmission of fault, to be guilty of that original sin which
the Catholic Church confesses, unless it be absolved by the
grace of Baptism. For in what way ought an infant, who has no
wish to sin, to be found at all guilty, unless, in some way, the fault
should appear to be transfused in the origin itself of the soul ?
Whence Father Augustine, commendable for his most religious
doubt, says that nothing is rashly to be affirmed : but that it
rests in His secret, as also many other things, which our medio-
crity cannot know. But this is truly and fixedly to be believed,
that God both creates souls, and, on some hidden ground, most
justly imputes to them, that they should be held indebted to the
sin of the first man. For it is better, in causes so secret, to
confess ignorance, than to assume what may be a perilous bold-
ness, since the Apostle says, ' For who hath known the mind
of the Lord? or who hath been His councillor?' and, 'For we
know in part, and we prophesy in part.'
" But since the tenor of the discussion has led us to this sub-
ject, that we should say, that souls generally are guilty through
the transmission of sin, it is meet to make mention of the Soul
of Christ the Lord, lest any one, perverted by calumnious in-
tent, should think that It was held bound by the like condition.
Let us hear then that its origin was prophesied by a worthy
herald to holy Mary ever- Virgin6. The Angel saitb, ' The Holy
Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the most High-
est shall overshadow thee ; therefore that Holy Thing which
shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.' Who, I
ask, in this majesty of birth, could either believe, that there
was any fault of original sin, or suspect any profane injury to
the flesh ? Without sin He undoubtedly came, Who was about
to loose the sins of all, conceived by the mystical in -breath-
ing, born of a Virgin. He derived nothing from Adam, Who
came, that the evil of Adam might be overcome. That most long
coil, wherewith we were bound, was broken ; the torrent, which
hurried us along, was dried there."
e Or, "that its holy origin was prophesied to Mary ever-
Virgin," accordingly as we read " sanctse " or " sanctam."
S. Ccesarius, Pope Felix, C. of Orange. 139
Cassiodorus makes a digression, to exempt one
soul from contracting original sin; but it is our
Lord's, not the Blessed Virgin's. In another place
he asserts that our Lord Alone was without sin ;
" 7 This, [viz. ' see if there beany way of wickedness in me,']
no other can say of himself, save He Who also said, ' Behold
the prince of this world cometh, and will find nothing in Me.'
For He Alone is perceived to be without sin, "Who is also
shown to have taken away the sins of man."
He affirms generally the universality of original
sin against the Pelagians on Ps. 1. 6.
48. The Canons of the second Council of Orange,
A.D. 529, were drawn up by S. Csesarius of Aries,
sent by him to Pope Felix, and by Felix sent to the
Council which was assembled for the consecration
of a Basilica, " strengthened by his Epistle 8."
They affirm strongly the universality of original sin,
and the injury therefrom to soul and body.
" 9 If any one says that, through the offence of the disobedi-
ence of Adam, the whole man, i. e. according to body and soul, was
not changed for the worse, but believes that, the liberty of will
remaining uninjured, the body only was subject to corruption,
he, deceived by the error of Pelagius, opposes Scripture, which
saith, ' The soul which hath sinned, it shall die,' and, ' Know ye
not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his ser-
vants ye are, whom ye obey?' and, 'By whom a man is overcome,
by him also is he brought in bondage.' "
7 On Ps. cxxxviii. 23.
8 Gennadius c. 86, and Pref. to second Council of Orange.
9 Cone. Araus. ii. cann. 1, 2. Concil. T. v. p. 809. Col.
The Council was approved by Boniface in a letter to S. Csesa
rius, A.D. 530. Ib. p. 830.
Fulg. Ferr., Xt.'s Flesh like and unlike to Mary's.
" If any assert that Adam's disobedience injured him alone,
not his posterity, or that the death of the body, which is the
punishment of sin, and not also sin which is the death of the
soul, passed through one man to the whole human race, he will
ascribe injustice to God, contradicting the Apostle, who saithj
' By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin,
and so death passed upon all men, in whom [in quo] all have
sinned.' "
S. Csesarius himself says ;
"l What good had the world done, that God should love it?
For Christ our Lord not only found all men evil, but also dead
by original sin."
49. Fulgentius Ferrandus (A.D. 533) contrasts
the Flesh of Christ, as being free from fault of
origin, definability, liability to sin, with that of
His mother :
" 2 The Flesh therefore of Christ was taken from His Mother ;
therefore moreover It is true Flesh ; but It is clearly holy,
because It was cleansed by the uniting of the Divinity. In the
Flesh of Christ, there is the nature of our flesh, but the fault of
our nature is not found there. So the Flesh of Christ is both like
and unlike to the flesh of Mary. Like, because It drew thence
Its origin ; unlike, because It did not thence contract the
contagion of a vitiated origin. Like, because It felt, although
voluntary, yet true infirmities ; unlike, because, neither through
will nor through ignorance, did It commit any iniquities what-
soever. Like, because It was passible and mortal; unlike,
because It was undefileable and the quickeuer even of the dead.
Like in kind, unlike in merit ; like in form, unlike in virtue.
Like, because It is 'the likeness of flesh of sin,' as the
Apostle saith, ' God sent His Son into the likeness of flesh of
1 Horn. 7. p. 52. Bal.
2 Epist. ad Anatol. de duab. in Christo naturis, n. 4. Bibl.
Patr. ix. 503.
140
Her Flesh, but its origin unvitiated. 141
sin.' See, how far it is taught that the Flesh of Christ received
from Mary by nature the cause of a new existence, according
to the wont of human birth, apart from any need of marital
intercourse, so that It should not be flesh of sin, because It
is Flesh of G-od ; yet should be ' likeness of flesh of sin,'
because It was truly born of mortal flesh ; and rightly mortal,
because It drew Its substance from mortal flesh. For through
what door should voluntary death enter into flesh of One Who
' had no sin ' whatsoever, unless It were born of Tier flesh, in
whom there could be sin, and through sin, death ? Let us
explain this in clear language. The Flesh of Christ was not
'conceived in iniquities.' On what ground then seemeth it,
that It experienced death ? We know certainly, that the Son
of God died for us, not out of necessity, but of will. Yet the
Holy Apostle is a witness to the truth, saying truly, ' Through
one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin.' In
That Flesh of Christ sin entered not. Whence did death,
although voluntary, creep in, but because Divine power caused
Him to be born without sin, but Divine mercy caused Him to
die without sin ? Yet in that in Him was substance of His
Mother, no proof that Christ took flesh of a mortal mother
is stronger than this, that He suffered death. Thanks be to
Him Who, by taking the nature of human flesh without guilt,
did not yet remove guilt without the penalty ; He ended the
penalty, and healed the nature, because He had a nature com-
mon with us."
50. Primasius, A.D. 550;
"3He took flesh, like other men, without sin, because It
was born neither of concupiscence, nor through marriage, but
of a Virgin." " That was not the flesh of sin, which was not born
of carnal delectation ; yet there was in It ' the likeness of flesh
of sin,' because It was mortal flesh." .
" * 4 Death passed upon all men.' Death, both of soul and
body, passed too on Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, from original sin,
8 On Eom. viii. 3. Bibl. P. x. 160.
4 On Horn. v. 14. Ib. p. 154.
142 S. Gregory Gt. ; Xt. Alone cleanses,
but they were made alive by the grace of God. Of Whom it is
said, ' He is not a God of the dead.' As the Apostle says, Ho
those also, who have not sinned ;' i. e. sin, bringing sentence of
death [capitale], so passed on men; because not only did Tie
die, who transgressed, but those also, who were begotten from
transgressors, are held guilty by the law of nature; i.e. a cor-
rupted root transmitted its fault through all the branches.
Adam slew : Christ made alive."
51. S. Gregory the Great asserts that the origin
of our Lord was alone without sin, on the same
ground as S. Augustine;
" 6 No one of tlie saints, of whatever virtues he may be full,
yet, being gathered from that blackness of the world, can be
equalled to Him of "Whom it is written, 'The Holy Thing
which shall be born of thee, shall be called the Son of God.'
For we, although we are made saints, yet are not born saints,
because we are constrained by the very condition of corrupti-
ble nature to say with the Prophet, ' Behold I was con-
ceived in iniquities, and in sins did my mother bear me.' But
He Alone was truly born holy, Who, that He might overcome
the condition itself of corruptible nature, was not conceived by
the commixture of carnal intercourse."
And, on the text, UG Who can bring a clean thing
out of an unclean?" which is sometimes quoted, in
behalf of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed
Virgin, he dwells on our Lord's being Alone clean,
on the same ground;
" 7 He Who by Himself is alone clean, avails to cleanse the
unclean. For man, living in corruptible flesh, has the unclean-
nesses of temptations impressed upon himself; because he de-
6 On Job, L. xviii. c. 52. n. 84. T. i. p. 598. Ben.
c Job xiv. 4.
7 Ib. L. xi, end, T. i. p. 392. Ben.
as Alone clean, being born of a Virgin. 143
rived them from his origin. For the very conception of his flesh,
for carnal delight, is uncleanness. "Whence also the Psalmist
saith, ' Behold I was conceived in iniquities, and in sins did
my mother bear me.' — But it may be understood in this place,
that the blessed Job, contemplating the Incarnation of the
Redeemer, saw that that Man Alone in the world was not con-
ceived of unclean seed, Who came into the world from the
Virgin in such wise, as to have nothing from unclean concep-
tion. For He did not proceed from man and woman, but from
the Holy Ghost and the Virgin Mary. He Alone then was
truly clean in His flesh, "Who could not be touched by delight
of flesh, since neither through carnal delight did He come
hither."
Elsewhere he speaks absolutely of our Lord
Alone being righteous or the object of God's good
pleasure 8.
When consulted about the origin of the soul, he
answered like S. Augustine,
" • As to the origin of the soul there was no small question
agitated among the holy Fathers ; but, whether itself descended
from Adam, or whether it be given to each, remained uncertain ;
and they owned that the question is insoluble in this life. For
it is a grave question, and cannot be comprehended by man.
For if the soul is born with the flesh from the substance of
Adam, why does it not die too with the flesh ? But, if it is not
born with the flesh, why, in that flesh which is derived from
Adam, is it bound by sins ? But while that is uncertain, this
8 " In our Redeemer Alone was the Father well pleased,
because in Him Alone He found no fault." In Ezek. L. i. Horn.
8. n. 21. " The Redeemer of the human race, made through the
flesh the Mediator of God and man, because He alone appeared
among men righteous, and yet came, even without sin, to the
punishment of sin, reproved man that he should not sin, and
stayed God that He should not strike." On Job, L. ix.c.38. n.;61.
9 Ep. ad Secundin. L. ix. Ep. 52. Opp. ii. 970, Ben.
144 S. Gregory; ail naturally born, born in sin.
is not uncertain, that unless a man be re-born by the grace of
Holy Baptism, every soul is bound by the bonds of original sin.
For hence it is written, ' There is none clean in His sight,
not even an infant of one day on the earth.' Hence David
saith, ' In iniquities I was conceived, &c.' Hence the Truth
Itself says, ' Except a man be born again of water and the
Holy Ghost, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.'
Hence the Apostle Paul saith, * As in Adain all die, so also in
Christ shall all be made alive.' Why then cannot an infant,
who hath done nothing, be clean in the sight of Almighty God?
Why was the Psalmist, born from lawful wedlock, conceived
in iniquity ? Why is one not clean, unless he have been
cleansed by the water of Baptism ? Why does every man die
in Adam, if he is not held by the bonds of original sin ? But
because the human race decayed [putruit] in the first parent,
as in the root, it derived aridity in the branches : and every man
is thence born with sin, whence the first man willed not to
abide without sin."
52. S. Isidore of Seville, A.D. 595 ;
" l After that, through envy of the devil, our first father,
seduced by a vain hope, fell, was forthwith exiled, and, being
lost, transmitted the root of evil-mindedness [malitia?] and sin
throughout his whole race.— God sent His own Son to be clothed
in flesh, and appear to men, and heal sinners. — He, One and
the Same, was God and Man, in the Nature of God equal
to the Father, in the Nature of Man, made mortal, among us,
for us, from us, remaining what He was, taking what He was
not, to free what He had made."
" - Man was, for sin, then delivered to the devil, when it was
said to him, ' Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.'
— Inward division and struggle in the mind of man is the pun-
fshment of sin, propagated from the first man to all his sons. —
This mutability was not created with man, but came to him, as
the reward of that first transgression ; but is now made matter
of nature, because it, as well as death, passes, by virtue of his
1 Sent. i. 11 and 14. 8 De Offic. i. 26.
John IV., All born in original sin, save Xt. 145
origin [originaliter], from the first man upon all men. — Christ,
in the form of a servant, for the excellence of His Conception,
is Lord of all; because, although He took flesh, He did not
take it from the passionate contagion of the flesh.*'
53. John IV., while Bishop of Rome elect, A.D
620, with three other chief clergy, in the vacancy of
the See, answered a letter of five Scotch Bishops,
some presbyters, and Abbots of Scotland, to Seve-
rinus, his predecessor, about Easter. Hearing too
that the Pelagian heresy was reviving, they lay
down, in stating the Catholic doctrine, that none
can be without sin, except Christ, Who was con-
ceived and born without sin, because all must at
least be subject to original sin.
" 3 And, first, it is the foolish talking of blasphemy to say
that man is without sin ; which no one can any wise be, save the
one Mediator between God and man, i.e. the Man Christ
Jesus, Who was conceived and born without sin. For the rest
of men, being born with original sin, are known, even if they be
without actual sin, to bear the testimony of the transgression
of Adam, according to the Prophet, who saith, ' For behold I
was conceived in iniquities, and in sins did my mother conceive
me.' "
54. Sophronius, Patriarch of Jerusalem, A.D.
629, writing a carefully worded Synodical Epistle
to the Monothelite Patriarch Sergius, speaks of the
actual sanctification of the Blessed Virgin, with a
view to her being a fit instrument of the Incar-
3 Bede, H. E. ii. 19. Perrone (P. i. Concl. n. iv.) says, that the
passage includes actual sins. It seems to me to exclude them
K
146 Sophronius, B, V. cleansed for Incarnation.
nation. The Epistle was read at the sixth General
Council.
" 4 He willed to become Man, that by Like He might cleanse
like, and by what was Akin He might save akin, and by what
was Connatural He might beautify connatural. To this end a
holy Yirgin is taken, and is sanctified as to body and spirit,
and so ministers to the Incarnation of the Creator, as being
pure and chaste and undefiled. From the undefiled, then,
and Virgin blood of the all-holy and undefiled Virgin Mary, the
Word Incarnate, truly Man, although conceived in the virgin
womb, and having fulfilled the times of the legitimate pregnancy,
likened to man in all physical things and those which involve
4 Ep. ad Ser. in Cone. Const, iii. Act. xi. Cone. T. vii. p.
896, 7. Col. All the praises, given to the B. V. in his homily
on the Annunciation (Ballerin. Syll. Monumm. ii. pp. 33 — 131),
bear on the Incarnation, and are an expansion of the Angel's
words, ' Hail, engraced one.' Sophronius, believing that the
Incarnation took place at the Angel's word 'Hail,' (as he
makes the Angel say expressly, " Thou hast conceived from the
time I addressed to thee, Hail, and uttered to thee that joy-pro-
ducing voice," n. 36, p. 99. add n. 28, p. 81,) no words could
be too strong, to speak of her pre-eminence then. The words
are put in the mouth of the Angel. " Thou hast surpassed all
creation, as shining more in purity than all creation, and having
received the Creator of all creation, and bearing Him in the
womb and giving birth to Him, and, out of all creation, having
become the mother of God. Wherefore I say to thee, ' Hail,
engraced one,' since thou hast been engraced more than all
creation, and of such joy and grace in thee I know the cause,
wherefore I again say aloud, ' The Lord is with thee.' " (n. 18, 19.
i. 63, 64.) " Wherefore seeing thy pre-eminence in all created
things,! say to thee the greatest things, 'The Lord is with thee.' "
(n. 21. p. 67.) " Truly blessed art thou among women, because
the blessing of the Father hath through thee dawned upon men,
and has freed them from the ancient curse." (n. 22. pp. 67, 68.)
He uses the same term, " fore-purified," as in his Epistle.
Bede; Jesus, from sinful flesh, Alone sinless. 147
not sin, and not disdaining our most passible poorness, is born
God in human form."
55. Bede, A.D. 701, is well known to have fol-
lowed S. Augustine;
" 5 ' Behold the Lamb of God.' Behold the Innocent, the free
from all sin ; in that He took bone from the bones of Adam,
and flesh from the flesh of Adam, but drew no stain of guilt
from sinful flesh (de came peccatrice)."
" 6 Lo, the "Word of God, co-eternal with the Father, and Light
from Light Begotten before all worlds, shall in the end of the
world take Flesh and soul, weighed down by no weight of sin,
and from the virgin's womb as a Bridegroom from his chamber
shall come forth into the world. ' Therefore also That Holy
Thing, which shall be born of thee, shall be called the Son of
God.' In distinction from our holiness, it is asserted that
Jesus shall be born holy, in a way belonging to Him Alone
[singulariter]. For we, although we are made holy, are not
born holy, because we are held bound by the condition of our
corruptible nature. So that each of us may truly say, groan-
ing with the Prophet, 'For behold I was shapen in iniqui-
ties, and in transgressions did my mother bear me.' For He
Alone was truly holy, Who, to overcome the condition of our
corruptible nature, was not conceived by the commingling of
carnal concupiscence."
"7What is said in Matthew, 'in Whom I am well pleased,'
is thus explained : — That every one who, repenting, corrects
things which he has made, thereby that he repents, shows that
he is displeased with himself, in that he amends what he has
made. And because the Almighty Father spoke of sinners, as
He could be understood by men in a human way, ' I repent
that I have made man upon earth,' He was in a manner dis-
pleased with Himself as to the sinners whom He created. But
in the Only Begotten Alone, our Lord Jesus Christ, He rested
6 On S. John i. 29. 6 On S. Luke i. 35.
7 On S. Luke iii. 22.
K 2
148 S. John Dam., B. V. cleansed for Incarnation.
with pleasure. For of Him Alone among men, He did not
repent to have created man, in Whom He found no sin what-
soever."
" 8 ' Behold I was conceived in iniquities, and in sin did my
mother conceive me.* As if he said, ' Lo, how Thou prevailest
against all ; not such only as I am now after such a deed, but
such as I first was, and every man, for Thou hast what Thou
canst impute to me and to all, from my very origin.' This he
says, speaking in the name of the whole human nice. For
' I was conceived in iniquities, as was every man.' For from
that righteous man Jesse, and from his lawful wife, was he ' con-
ceived in iniquities,' i. e. in adultery ? By no means. For that
chaste act hath in the wife no blame, but yet draws with it the
appointed punishment, delectation. "Which, since it proceeded
from iniquity, i. e. from the transgression of the first man, and
because it is in a certain way ' iniquity,' therefore he says, ' in
iniquities I was conceived.' But He ' prevaileth,' because He
Alone was conceived without delectation ; therefore He Alone
was born without pain. And therefore He Alone hath what
He may impute to a child even of a day old."
56. S. John Damascene, A.D. 730, like S. Gre-
gory of Nazianzum, speaks of her "cleansing," just
antecedent to and preparatory to the Incarnation.
" 9 After the assent of the holy Virgin, the Holy Spirit came
upon her, according to the word of the Lord which the Angel
spake, cleansing her and bestowing upon her a power to
receive the Godhead of the Word, and also a conceiving
power."
This statement of John Damascene is quoted by
S. Thomas Aq.1 as an alleged ground, why it
8 On Ps. 50. Opp. T. 8. p. 563. e De fide orthod. iii. 2.
1 3 p. q. 27. art. 3. ad 3. It is among the counter authori-
ties quoted by Scotus in 3. d. 3. q. 1, and subsequently by GK
Biel. See above, p. 66.
Bede; B. V. cleansed from ^ fomes ' at Incarnation.
should not be thought that the fomes peccati was
totally removed from the B. V. until after the
Incarnation. He himself thought that the cleans-
ing might be twofold ; one, preparatory to the Con-
ception of Christ, not from any impurity of fault or
from the fomes, but rather collecting her mind
into one ; but that, secondly, the Holy Spirit worked
a cleansing in her, by means of the Conception of
Christ, which is the work of the Holy Spirit. And
in this way it might be said, that He cleansed her
wholly from the fomes peccati, or the law of our
members.
In a sermon among the works of John Damas-
cene, it is said,
"2Her did the Father predestinate, the prophets through
the Holy Ghost foretold ; the sanctifying power of the Spirit
came upon her, and cleansed her and sanctified her, and, as it
were, forebedewed her. And then, Thou, the Word of the
Father, didst, uncircumscribed, dwell in her."
In like way Bede says,
"3The Holy Spirit coming upon the Virgin showed in her in
two ways the efficacy of His Divine power; for He both
purified her mind from all defilement of sins (as far as human
frailty permits), that so she might be worthy of the heavenly
birth, and by His sole operation He created in her womb the
holy and venerable Body of our Redeemer. — The virtue of the
Most Highest overshadowed the Bl. Mother of God. For the
Holy Spirit, when He filled her heart, tempered it from all
heat of carnal concupiscence, cleansed it from temporal desires,
and consecrated at once her mind and body with heavenly gifts.
2 Horn. i. in dormit. B. M. V. n. 3. T. ii. p. 859.
• Horn, in Fest. Ann. Opp. T. 7. p. 337.
149
150 Bede, Alcuin, Jesus Alone sinless,
' Therefore also that holy Thing which shall be born of thee '
(he saith) ' shall be called the Son of God.' Because thou shalt
conceive from sanctification of the Spirit, That which is bom
shall be holy. The Nativity agrees with the Conception, that
since thou, a Virgin, conceivest against the wont of human
nature, thou shouldest conceive the Son of God above the way
of human nature. For all we men are conceived in iniquities,
and born in sins. Our Redeemer Alone, Who vouchsafed to be
incarnate for us, was born at once holy, because He was con-
ceived without iniquity."
57. Alcuin, A.D. 780, or an author nearly con-
temporary 4, implies that the absence of original sin
in our Lord was owing to the mode of His Birth.
" 5 In the end of the ages He [God the Son] took from Mary
Ever-Virgin perfect Man of our nature, and the Word was made
Flesh, by assuming manhood, not by exchanging Divinity, the
Holy Spirit coming in the Blessed Virgin, and the Power of
the Highest overshadowing her. It is written, ' Wisdom built
her a house,' i. e. created flesh in the womb of the Virgin,
animated by a rational soul. Whence it is asked rightly, since
the works of the whole Trinity are inseparable, why is the
Holy Ghost alone said to have wrought the creation of the
flesh ? But because sanctification is wrought through the Spirit,
and the same Spirit is in such wise God, as to be also the gift
of God, therefore the Holy Ghost is said to have created the
4 Frobenius placed "The Confession of Faith" among Alcuin's
doubtful works. Mabillon answered the objections of Daille
to its genuineness, and showed that it belongs to Alcuin and his
age. The characters of the MS., from which Chifflet published it,
" approach very nearly to the time of Charlemagne, and do not
seem later than the 9th century." Test, de antiq. cod. Boer.
Opp. T. 2. p. 380. The only objection is, that the name of
Albinus occurs in lighter ink or an erasure. Mabillon, ib. p.
372. But if not Alcuin's, whose could it be in that age ?
6 Conf. Fid. ii. n. 14. Opp. T. ii. p. 401.
for born above way of nature. 151
Flesh of Christ in the Virgin's womb, that we may understand
that It was so created through sanctification of Divine Grace
by the gift of the Holy Ghost that It should both be a Divine
work, and, in the unity of the Person of the only Son of God,
It should be so assumed without any defilement of original sin,
that, sanctified through the Conception itself and united sub-
stantially with the "Word of God, It should not be able there-
after to admit sin."
In his Comment on Psalm 50, bespeaks of the
universality of original sin in all naturally con-
ceived.
" ° Accordingly he confesses not only his own present sin, but
that of his parents in which he himself was conceived and born,
saying, ' Behold I was conceived in iniquities, and in transgres-
sions did my mother conceive me.' For, ' who can make me
clean, conceived of unclean seed, save Thou, God, Alone "Who
art without sin ?' What marvel then, that I did, wherein I con-
fess myself a sinner, who know that from original sin I was
already conceived in iniquities, who contracted sins before I
had the beginnings of life ? 0 Lord Jesu, with what praise do
we extol Thy mercy, what worthy thanksgiving can we pay
Thee, Who didst free us from the debt of this handwriting in
Thy Blood, destroying on the Cross our bonds of sins, which
were written against us by our first parents ? ' For lo, Thou
lovest truth, &c.' As in the former verse he proved by the
common transgression, that no one was rendered exempt from
sins, &c."
58. Rabanus Maurus (A.D. 847), like those before
him, ascribes the sinlessness of our Lord's Human
Nature to the mode of His Conception, differing, as
it did, from that of all besides, and in fact from that
of His Mother.
% r • j
6 Expos, in Ps. Poenit. Opp. T. i. p. 352.
152 Rabanus Maurus ; Haymo ;
" 7 This which he says, ' into the likeness of sinful flesh,'
shows that we indeed have ' flesh of sin,' but that the Son of
God had 'the likeness of flesh of sin,' not 'flesh of sin.' For all
we men, who have been conceived of the seed of man coming
together with a woman, necessarily employ the words, which
David spake, ' for in sin did my mother conceive me.' But, be-
cause, not through any contagion of man, but by the Holy Spirit
Alone coming upon the Virgin and by the Power of the Most
High overshadowing, He came into a body undefiled [i.e. a virgin
body], He had indeed the nature of our body, but had not in
any way the pollution of sin, which is transmitted to those con-
ceived by the motion of concupiscence. For therefore was a
Virgin's womb chosen for the Birth of the Lord, that the Flesh
of the Lord might differ in holiness from our flesh. For it was
like in the cause, not in the quality of the sin of the substance.
On that ground then did he call it ' like ;' because from the
same substance of flesh He had not the same Nativity, because
the Body of the Lord was not subjected to sin."
59. Haymo of Halberstadt lived to A.D. 853.
" 8 He Himself is in a special way [singulariter] the True
Witness, Who is never changed ; as also He is called specially
Holy, whereas there are many other called also holy, who, in
comparison with Him Who is without sin, are unrighteous.
For although they are holy, yet, because they are mere men,
they cannot be without sin, and sometimes ' are liars.' But,
Christ is essentially holy and true, because He 'did no sin,
neither was guile found in His mouth.' "
" 9 You must observe narrowly, that he does not say abso-
lutely, that he saw ' the Son of man,' but one ' like the Son of
man.' For that Angel bore the person of Christ, who there-
fore is now not called the Son of man, but ' like the Son of
man,' because, having conquered death, He 'now dieth no
7 On Eom. viii. 3. Opp. T. v. p. 229.
8 In Apoc. iii. 14. 1. ii. init. f. 45. ed. 1535.
• In Apoc. i. 13. 1, i. f. 15.
Rhemigius. 153
more, death shall have no more dominion over Him ;' or else
He is called ' like unto the Son of Man,' because, although He
took our flesh, yet He did no sin, but appeared in the ' likeness
of flesh of sin.' For it is the property of man, not to be with-
out sin. Whence, since Christ had not sin, therefore it is said
by the Prophet, * I am a worm and no man."1
60. Rhemigius (whether of Lyons, A. D. 855,
or Auxerre, A.D. 880) follows S. Augustine :
" l Why saith he, that He was ' sent in the likeness of flesh of
sin,' when we must believe in truth that He took a true body,
of flesh and bones ? But our body or flesh is ' flesh of sin,'
because it is engendered with passion. Therefore it is con-
ceived with sin, it is born with original sin, and cannot live in
this world without sin. But the Body of Christ did not have
its origin through passionateness of male and female, but by
the work of the Holy Spirit from the seed of woman without
seed of man, and therefore without sin was It conceived, with-
out sin was It born, and without sin passed from this world ;
and herein was His Flesh after ' the likeness of flesh of sin,'
because He had true flesh, but without sin which we have."
" ' 2 Thou pre-ventedst ' [i.e. shalt pre-vent] ' Him in blessings
of sweetness,' i.e. in immunity from sin. In Adam all were pre-
vented by a curse. He Alone was ' free among the dead.'
Thou pre-ventedst Him, i.e. Thou first bestowedst on Him gifts
of grace, that He might be the first-born among many brethren.
— Truly He was prevented with these blessings, because He was
conceived of the Holy Ghost. For Adam was prevented by ful-
ness of bitterness, in whom all die ; Christ was prevented in
blessings of sweetness, in Whom all shall be made alive. Or,
Thou preventedst Him, because there was no one before Him,
1 On Eom. viii. 3. Bibl. Patr. T. 8. p. 914. He repeats the
clause as to the conception of all besides in sin, on Heb. vii.
Ib. p. 1099.
2 In Ps. 20, B. P. xvi. 1082.
154 Rhemigius, John Geometry
•
who was not first under the curse ; He, first and alone in the
human race, was free from all sin.
" 3 And not only dost Thou, when judged, [the Father in the
Son,] judge all who are judged in such guilt as mine, herein,
that they justly, Thou unjustly, but all men also, because all are
sinners, but Thou Alone without sin4. And he transfers to
himself the whole human race. ' For behold I was conceived
in iniquities ! ' and in what iniquities, he subjoins, ' and in sins
did my mother conceive me,' i. e. she conceived in carnal con-
cupiscence. 5 For men are not therefore conceived in sin,
on the ground of the act of marriage being sin ; for this chaste
act has in the married no fault ; but the origin of sin draws
with it the due punishment, as if from the root. For the
husband is not mortal because he is a husband. For the Lord
too was mortal, but not from sin : He took on Him our pun-
ishment, not our fault."
61. John Geometra, a priest, perhaps a Bishop 6,
and a commentator on Holy Scripture, probably in
the tenth or the beginning of the eleventh cen-
tury7, says: —
" 8 This Fruit [of the womb, i. e. Jesus] Alone is blessed,
because It is produced without man, and without sin."
3 In Ps. 50, ib. p. 1138.
4 S. Augustine's. 5 Abridged from S. Aug. mostly.
6 He is called " Proto-thronus " in one MS., Harles. viii. 625.
Bailer. Syll. ii. 133.
7 Eustathius of Thessalonica, A. D. 1086, mentions him as
having written Iambics " on the all- venerable Nativity of
Christ," earlier than two other writers of Iambics on sacred
subjects, one of whom, Michael Protekdikus, was but a few years
earlier than himself. All wrote in imitation of S. John Damas-
cene. Eust. in hymn. Pent. Damascen., Spicil. Horn. v. 165.
See Ballerini, 1. c.
8 Quoted in Catena Aurea on S. Luke i. 42.
S. Bruno Herbip., S. Peter DamianL 155
62. S. Bruno, Bishop of Herbipolis, A.D. 1033,
extracts only the words of the Commentary, of un-
certain age, once believed to be S. Jerome's.
" 9 This verse (' in sin did my mother conceive me') sets forth
the fall of the whole human race. For man is conceived and
born in original sin, which is derived from Adam, but is purified
by Baptism through the grace of God."
63. S. Peter Damiani, A.D. 1057, insists on the
universality of original sin, as the ground why man
could not cleanse the sin of men, either as priest
or as sacrifice, all having been conceived in iniquity,
according to the Miserere Psalm.
" l Man sinned on persuasion of the devil, and the whole tree
of the human race was poisoned in the root. The unhappy
father [Adam] fell through appetite, and his whole race was
made guilty by nature ; as the Apostle says, ' We were by nature
children of wrath, like as also the rest.' Adam then became a
leaven and corrupted the whole multitude of his sons ; for, in
that he is vitiated by the pestilential poison of the serpent,
the whole mass of the human race is corrupted in him. — But
the pitying and merciful God willed not that His creature, which
He had formed after His own image and likeness, should alto-
gether perish. — But they who were subject to sins could not
loose the bands of sins, nor could sinners justify sinners. Need
was, then, that such a Priest should be found, who, when cleans-
ing away the defilement of sins in others, should not feel in
Himself what was to be cleansed, and, while He wiped away
the contagion of others' guilt, should not have any stain of
leprosy in Himself. But such an one could not be found in
the human race, since every one truly chanted with the pro-
phet this verse : ' Behold I was conceived in iniquities, and in
sins did my mother produce me,' and, as is said by the Apostle,
9 In Ps. 1. 5. Bibl. Patr. T. xviii. p. 158.
1 Serm. 45. in Nat. B. V. M. Opp. T. ii. pp. 102, 3. Par. 1662.
156 S. Peter Damiani owns original sin
' All have sinned and are in need of the glory of God.' — Since
then such a man could not be found in the human race, lest
man should perish in his sin, the Creator of men, taking flesh
of the most blessed Virgin, was made man without sin, being
conceived without sin in the Virgin's womb, without sin He
conversed in the world. — Lo, now was a Priest, having Himself
no sins, and therefore worthy and able, by offering sacrifice, to
cleanse the sins of others. — Need was, that there should be a
rational sacrifice, which should expiate a rational creature. But
any sinful man, as he was unworthy to offer sacrifice, so also, no
less, himself to be the sacrifice. "What then should our
Priest do ? — Whence should the Mediator of God and men
take a sacrifice of propitiation, to restore peace between God
and man ? For every earthly creature, if rational, had con-
tracted the virus of sin from the root of the first parent ; if
irrational, it could not justify the rational. — What should He
do ? Consider diligently the tenderness of that ineffable piety ;
estimate the immense and priceless weight of the Divine charity.
Because the price for our redemption could not be found in
[created] things, our '.Redeemer offered Himself to the Father
for us a sacrifice ' for a sweet-smelling savour.' So He Himself
was made Priest and Sacrifice ; Himself the Redeemer and the
Price."
In another place he states, in plain terms, that
the Blessed Virgin was conceived in original sin,
in illustration of the principle that bad and
Simoniacal priests, although themselves most de-
praved, did not corrupt the sacraments which they
administered, but could confer good and true sacra-
ments.
" 2 Forasmuch as the Mediator Himself of God and men too
derived His origin from sinners, and from the fermented mass
took upon Him the unleaven of sincerity, without any infec-
2 Opusc. vi. c. 19, T. iii. p. 49, quoted by Pet. de Inc. xiv. 2. 6.
in the B. V., exempts her from actual sin. 157
tion of decay [vetustatis, the old man] ; y.ea, that I may
speak more expressly, from that very flesh of the Virgin which
was conceived from sin, came forth flesh without sin, which of
free-will also effaced the sins of flesh."
Petau subjoins,
" Manifestly Peter in this place confesses that the Blessed
Virgin was affected by the original fault, which he must have
meant, as the force and ground of the argument shows."
On the other hand, in the passage quoted in
behalf of the Immaculate Conception, S. Peter
Damiani (as Petau says s of the same expression in
a sermon then attributed to S. Ildephonso) is speak-
ing of the actual stains, which we all contract.
This appears from the context. He is applying to
the Blessed Virgin the words of the Canticles,
" Who is this that cometh up from the wilderness,
as a column of smoke, perfumed with myrrh and
frankincense ?"
"* Myrrh," he says, "consolidates bodies dissolved, and
claims to itself the lifeless corpse, that it putrefy not. But
frankincense is kindled to God in prayer, as we are taught by
manifold testimonies of Scriptures. Under ' myrrh ' under-
stand continence ; under ' frankincense,' devotion. For the
flesh of the Virgin, taken from Adam, did not admit the stains
3 1. c. n. 5. " But the same (Ildephonso) in Serm. xi. on the
Assumption of the B. V. says, ' the flesh of the Virgin, taken
from Adam, did not admit the stains of Adam.7 But, as I opine,
he is not speaking of the original stain, but of the faults which
stain the descendants of Adam."
4 Serm. 40. T. p. 93. This is one of the sermons which
Nicolas of Clairvaux calls his in his Dedicatory Epistle in
Bibl. Garth, iii. 193. It stands there as the 6th, p. 205.
But there is no reason to believe one of his character.
158 S. Bruno Carth., original sin universal;
of Adam, but a singular purity of continence was changed into
the brightness of eternal light. Moreover who could adequately
praise her devotion, when he remembers the Archangel sent,
the Spirit supervening, the Son conceived, God born, a new
star, the glory of the Magi, the grace of the gifts, and, above
all these, the testimony of her conscience ? These two things
are they, which surrounded the Virginal substance with com-
plete virtue, continence and devotion, whereof the one so pos-
sessed the flesh, the other, the mind, that the cleanest flesh,
the purest mind should consecrate more singularly the Mother
of the Lord."
In the same sermon, our Lord is introduced, as
applying to her the words, (which in later times
were em ployed to prove the Immaculate Conception,)
c Thou art all fair V as speaking of her sanctifica-
tion through the Incarnation.
" 6 Thou art all beautiful, because thou art all deified. There
is no spot in thee, because the Holy Spirit supervened in thee,
Who cleansed thee."
64. S. Bruno the Carthusian, A.D. 1086, gives
the usual statements of the universality of original
sin, on Psalm li. 5, and Kom. viii. 3, and does not
except the B. V. On the contrary, he speaks of
the continuance of all under original sin until the
death of our Lord, in a way which seems to include
the B. V., the more, since it is in a sermon on her
Purification.
" 7 Whereas Thou art separate from sin, ' I was conceived in
original iniquities/ i. e., I, first existing in original iniquities,
6 Cant. iv. 7. 6 Ib. p. 91.
7 In Ps. ]. Opp. i. p. 170. ed, Col. 1611.
save in Christ. 159
was conceived by my mother. As though he would say, ' Be-
fore I was conceived by my mother, while I was still in my
father's loins, I was already in original sins.' "Whence the
Apostle says, ' death passed upon all,' i. e. original sin by which
men come to death, unless it is purged by Baptism. Not only
before the conception was I in original iniquities, but, ' and in
sins,' i.e. in original iniquities, cmy mother conceived me,' i.e.
but also in the conception itself was I in those very original
sins. And all this is as if he would set down briefly, ' In this
Thou prevailest against me and all human beings, because Thou
art ever separate from sin, but I and all human beings, both
before conception and in the conception itself, are weighed
down by original iniquities.' "
" 8 ' He freed me from the law of sin,' i.e. from the 'fomes' of
sin, and from the law ' of death,' from the act of the ' fomes ' of
sin, lest I should do what that ' fomes ' ill-advised me. I am
truly ' freed from the law of sin,' for it is by the Son of God.
For God sent His Son, not that the Son was absent any where,
but, because He Himself, invisible by nature, became, by the
flesh united to Himself, visible, He is said to be sent, according
to our knowledge. God then sent His Son not into flesh of sin,
but 'into the likeness of flesh of sin,' into flesh like sinful flesh.
For Christ endured the whole matter of flesh except sin, and
by His Son Who was sent He condemned sin, i. e. the * fomes '
of sin, which was in our flesh. — Or thus, He condemned sin, i.e.
Satan, for the sin which he wrought on the Flesh of Christ.
For the devil had right over all men for original sin, of which
since Christ was not guilty (for He was not born of concupis-
cence of the flesh), the devil used towards Him an unlawful
power [in His death] " &c.
" 9 The two weeks are two periods, under the law and under
grace. The one, of the Old, the other of the New Testament.
The first from Moses to Christ, the second from the birth of
Christ to the end of the world. The good woman, then, that
8 In Eom. viii. 3. Opp. ii. 45.
9 Serm. 3. in Purif. S. M, Opp. T. iii. p. 110.
160 S. Bruno exempts Mary only from conceiving
part of the people which bare male children [i. e. good works,
as he had just explained it], exercised itself in good works, but
for seven days it was unclean, because, to the Nativity of Christ
when that week was finished, it could not be loosed from
original sin, either by circumcision, or by generation of sons
[good works], or by any other observation of the law whatever.
* For,' as the Apostle saith, ' the law made nothing perfect.' In
that whole period, then, that woman could not be called clean
who was denied with such a stain. She hath original sin, and it
is impossible that she can be clean. But thou sayest, * Then when
Christ was born, that woman was cleansed, inasmuch as in His
Nativity the week was ended.' Not so. Why ? Because she
must yet abide thirty-three days in the blood of her purifica-
tion. For not by the Nativity, but by the Passion and Blood
of Christ was original sin remitted. For in the thirty-third
year from His Nativity our Saviour suffered, that by thirty-
three days we may understand as many years. Then all who
kept the law and bore males, i. e. persevered in good works,
were cleansed from original sin. The Blood then of Christ
redeemed both those who were before Him and those after
Him. For whoever before the Passion of Christ held the
faith and kept the law were both cleansed and redeemed by
the shedding of His Blood."
He excepts Mary : yet not in regard to her own
conception, but in regard to her Conception of our
Lord.
" * What has been said of the aforesaid woman does not
appear to belong to the B. V. M., although she too observed
that same law, especially since it is not said simply, ' the woman
which has borne a male child,' but with the limiting addition,
* which shall have conceived seed and borne a male child.' For
this was said specially for her sake, since she alone bare, having
conceived no seed, who remained a virgin before bearing, a
virgin in bearing, a virgin after bearing."
Ib. p. 111.
in original sin. 161
On the other hand, he speaks of her conquering
Satan, hut, by the acceptance of God's will, that
she should be the Mother of the Lord. The line
of death reached to her (as being herself born in
the natural way), but was broken in her, not
through her conception, but in the active grace of
her humility.
" 2 The first head of this line is Adam ; the second is Christ.
This line begins in Eve and ends in Mary. In the beginning
was death ; and in the end is life. Death was caused by Eve :
life was restored through Mary. Eve was conquered by the
devil ; Mary bound and conquered the devil. For since the
line is extended from Eve to her, in her at length that Hook
was bound and incarnate, through Whom that Leviathan was
taken, the old Serpent who is the devil and Satan, that he who
entered his kingdom through a woman, should be drawn out of
his kingdom through a woman."
According to the common Patristic exposition, our
Lord was symbolized in that passage of Job, " 3 Canst
thou draw out Leviathan with a hook ?" and he was
drawn out and bound by the B. V., in that of her
He was born, Who destroyed his kingdom, and
bound the strong man.
In like way, in the one passage pointed out in
the Index to S. Bruno, which Perrone quotes *, he
is speaking of her adult grace and freedom from
sin.
" 8 The Gentile people aforetime dead in sins, winch sliall be
3 Serm. ii. de Nat. B. V. Ib. p. 108.
8 Job xli. 1, &c. * p. 103.
• In Ps. 101. Opp. i. 400.
162 £. Bruno Ast.; original sin universal.
created through the laver of regeneration, so as to be a new
creature, shall praise the Lord with a new song for the new
Man Who is given to the world, believing Him in the heart,
praising Him with the mouth, and confessing Him in w'orks.
This generation shall praise the Lord, because the Lord Him-
self, Who beholdeth lofty things from afar, hath looked forth,
i. e. looked from afar not only upon the Jews who seemed to be
near, but also on the G-entiles, in that by His Incarnation the
Day-spring from on high hath visited us ; which he explains
more evidently, when he subjoins, ' The Lord looked from
heaven upon earth,' when from the royal thrones He came to the
Virgin's womb. For this is that incorrupt earth, which the
Lord hath blessed, and on that ground free from all occasion
of sin, through whom we have known the way of life, and have
received the promised Truth."
65. S. Bruno Astensis has the same language as
to the universality of original sin.
" c God c openeth His eyes ' on man, because He narrowly
searches out his doings and thoughts. ' Who can make clean
what is conceived of unclean seed ? Is it not Thou Who art
Alone?' He means, ' alone clean.' Tor because every man is
conceived and born in original sin, he is deservedly said to be
1 conceived of unclean seed,' whom, however, He cleansed by
His own Blood and the water of Baptism, ' Who is Alone.' "
" 7 Can man be justified, compared with God ? or can he
appear as clean, who is born of a woman ? Thou art, he saitb,
like the rest of men, nor oughtesb thou to deny that thou art
born of woman, who is frail and a gate of sin8. Thou art not
then clean, nor, compared to God, canst thou be justified, that
0 On Job xiv. Opp. i. 247. Rome, 1789.
7 On Job xxv. Ib. p. 266.
8 The editor subjoins from S. Thomas Aq., " He says this
markedly ; because from this very thing, that man is ' born of
woman,' through concupiscence of the flesh, he contracts a
stain."
S. Anselm ; how was Xt. sinless, from sinful mass ?
thou hast said, ' let them set equity against me, and let my
judgment come to victory.' c For lo the moon shineth not, and
the stars are not clean in His sight ; how much more corruption,
and the son of man a worm ! ' For what is meant by the moon
but the Church ? or what by stars but the saints ? So he
says, the Churches and the stars of the New Testament, i. e.
those renewed by the holy water of Baptism and released from
original sin, are not altogether pure before the eyes of God."
66. S. Anselm (A.D. 1093) in his treatise on the
Incarnation, "Cur Deus homo," introduced the
person at whose instance he wrote the treatise,
asking,
" 9 In what way out of the sinful mass, i. e. from the human
race, the whole of which was infected with sin, God took a
Man without sin, as it were the unleavened out of the leavened ?
For although the Conception of that Man be in itself pure and
without the sin of carnal delectation, yet the Virgin herself, from
whom He was taken, was conceived in iniquity, and was born
with original sin, since she too sinned in Adam, in whom all
sinned."
" 10 Anselm answeringhim," Petau says, " puts this
as a thing admitted, that That Man 4 was without
sin,' although ' taken from the sinful mass/ and pro-
ceeds to explain how this was effected."
S. Anselm's first answer is, that it must be so,
whether we understand it or no.
" Since it is certain that That Man is God and the Eeconciler
of sinners, it is beyond doubt, that He is altogether without
sin ; but this He cannot be, unless He be taken without sin
from the sinful mass."
His second answer here is, that the redemption
• ii. 16. 10 De Inc. xiv, 2. 6.
163 L 2
1 64 S. Anselm ; Jesus born sinless from the sinful
profited those who lived before its accomplishment,
and that the B. V. was one of these.
" That Virgin, from whom was taken that Man, of Whom we
speak, was of those who before His Nativity were cleansed from
sins through Him, and, in tliat her cleanness, He was taken
from her."
A further answer he proposed to give ', but re-
served it for a supplemental treatise, " On the Con-
ception by a Virgin, and original sin 2." Here he
anew proposes the question for himself, " in what
way God took unto Himself Man out of the sinful
mass of the human race without sin V But had he
believed that the Blessed Virgin had been con-
ceived without original sin, he could not even have
put this question, because the question would have
been solved in her own birth. For, if the trans-
mission of original sin had been stopped in her,
there could have been no difficulty as to its
not being transmitted further. But S. Anselm's
answer includes the Blessed Virgin among those
to whom it was transmitted ; for it is, that original
sin is only transmitted to those born after the way
of nature from Adam, and that our Lord was not
so born.
" * "We must now consider whether this, as it were, inheritance
of sin and of the punishment of sin, justly passes to the Man,
1 Ib. c. 18. p. 94. 2 Opp. p. 97.
8 " Qualiter Deus hominem assumpsit de generis humani
massa peccatrice absque peccato.'1
4 De Cone. Virg. c. 11, 12.
mass, as conceived not in the way of man. 165
AVho was descended from Adam through the Virgin." His
answer is, " Since Mary, from whom alone Jesus was, was from
Adam and Eve, He too must be from them. For that it was
expedient, that He Who should redeem the race of man, should
be and should be born of the father and mother of all." But
that " thus too it was not difficult to understand that the Son of
the Virgin was not subject to the sin or debt of Adam." For
"Adam could not transmit the evils [which he had brought upon
himself] to any person, although propagated from him, in whose
generation neither his nature nor his will gave him any power."
Further, that it was inconceivable that " 5 through the seed,
which no created nature, nor will of the creature, nor any power
given to any one, produced or seminated, but the will of God
Alone, proper for the propagation of man, did, by a new power,
sever, clean from sin, from the Blessed Virgin, any necessity of
another's sin or debt or punishment should pass to that same
Man, even although He were not taken into the Person of God,
but came into being as a pure man;" that the words "in sin
did my mother conceive me" did not apply to a conception, in
which there was no delectation, and so did not interfere with
the grounds for " 6 asserting that the seed taken of the Virgin
was pure, although it was from the sinful mass;" that the
case of John Baptist and others, born of barren and aged
parents, was different, in that, in their case, " 7 nothing new was
given to the nature of Adam, as it was in the Son of the
Virgin," but only the natural powers of the parents were re-
paired ; wherefore, he adds, " since they were generated through
the natural propagation given to Adam, they cannot and ought
not, in the miracle of their conception, to be likened to Him
of Whom we are speaking, so that they could be shown to have
been freed from the band of original sin."
Even in that passage, part of which is sometimes
quoted in proof that S. Anselm thought that the
B. V. was exempted from original sin, he speaks of
her being cleansed only " by faith before the Con-
5 Jb. c. 13, 6 c. 14. 7 c. 1C,
166 S. Anselm, Purity of B. V. below that of Xt.
ception itself" of her Son; but faith being the
act of one, endowed with knowledge and will, this,
of course, implies that S. Anselm did not believe
her to have been exempted in her mother's womb.
" 8 It was fitting that that Virgin — to whom God the Father
purposed to give His Only-Begotten Son, Whom, being
Begotten Equal to Himself, He loved as Himself, in such wise,
that He should be, by nature, One and the Same, Son of God
the Father and of the Virgin; and whom the Son chose for
Himself to make her substantially His mother, and from
whom the Holy Spirit willed, and purposed to operate, that
He should be conceived and born, from "Whom He Himself
proceeded — should gleam with a purity, than which no greater
can be conceived under God. But how that same Virgin was
cleansed through faith, before that Conception itself, I have
said 9, where also I have given another reason for this very thing,
of which I am here treating."
Albertus Magnus, A. D. 1260, quotes this pas-
sage of S. Anselm, as showing that the B. V. was
conceived in original sin, but that she was sanctified
from it in her mother's womb.
" : S. Anselm says, ' the blessed Virgin gleamed with purity,
8 Ib. c. 18.
9 Eeferring to the Cur Deus homo, ii. 16, 17.
1 De laud. Virg., on Missus est, q. 127. Opp. xx. p. 85. S.
Antoninus quotes John of Naples to the same effect, " that
this of Anselm is rather for, than against [the Conception in
original sin]. For it was meet that the purity of the mother
should be beneath the purity of Christ God, Who did not con-
tract original, nor commit actual, sin ; and this comes to be
thereby, that the mother committed no actual, but contracted
original sin. But if she had not contracted original sin, then
her purity would be equalled to the purity of Christ, and would
not be beneath it." Again, Guido of Perpignan, in his Con-
Beleth, B. V. conceived in original sin. 167
than which no greater can be conceived under heaven.' But
the purity of Man- God is, neither to have nor ever to have had
original sin; the greater after that is to have had original
sin, but immediately and altogether to have been cleansed
from it. Therefore the B. Y. ought indeed to be conceived in
original sin, but forthwith to be wholly cleansed from it,
therefore she ought to be sanctified in the womb."
67. JohnBeleth, A.D. 1102, was a contemporary
of S. Bernard, and asserts the same ground against
the celebration of the Festival of the Conception,
that the B. V. was born in original sin.
" 2 Some sometimes celebrated the feast of the Conception
[of the B. Y.], and perchance they still celebrate it ; but it is
not authentic or approved ; nay, indeed, it seems that it should
be rather forbidden. And on this ground, that the B. Y. was
conceived in sin."
68. Rupertus (A.D. 1111), having explained the
two " breasts " in the Canticles to be the two gifts of
the Holy Spirit, the one, the remission of sins, the
other, the distribution of graces, and that these
two gifts were signified by the two clauses of the
Angelic salutation, " the Holy Ghost shall come
upon thee," and " the power of the Highest shall
overshadow thee," apostrophized the Blessed
Virgin ;
cordantia, p. 19, " He [St. A.] does not say ' equally with God,'
but 'under God' Christ, because she could not sin either
mortally or venially, which we believe to have been granted to
none of the saints. But thereby Anselm does not exclude her
from original fault," quoting the Cur Deus homo, ii. 16.
2 De div. off. c. 146. de Assump. B. Y. f. 561. Lyons, 1565.
168 Rupert., B. V. conceived in sin cleansed by love.
" 3 Thou hadst not experienced the fault of this world, the
wine of carnal pleasure, without the intoxication whereof no
woman, beside thee, ever could or can conceive, and yet thou
couldest judge how much better and more vehement, sweeter
and stronger, was the pleasure or love of God, in which thou
conceivedst, having been without doubt given to drink of that
torrent of pleasure. Thou too couldest truly say, * Behold I was
conceived in iniquities, and in sins did my mother conceive me.'
.b'or, being from that mass which was corrupted in Adam, thou
lackedst not the hereditary taint of original sin ; but before the
face of this love neither that nor any other sin could stand ;
before the face of this fire all chaff perished, that the whole
habitation might become holy, in which God during nine
whole months should dwell, the whole substance [materia]
should become clean, from which the Holy Wisdom of God
should build Himself an eternal habitation."
69. A Sermon on the Nativity of S. John Baptist,
formerly attributed to S. Bernard, Mabillon
thought to be older than S. Bernard 4.
" 6 The second honour [of S. John B.] is his sanctification
3 In Cant. 1. i. init. Opp. i. p. 986. col. 2.
4 S. Ber. Opp. T. ii. p. 688.
5 Ib. n. 3. pp. 689, 690. In a dedication to Count Theobald,
his patron, Nicolas of Clairvaux claimed this sermon, with
eighteen others, as his own (in Tissier, Bibl. Cist. iii. p. 193).
"We have no reason to believe a vain man, who was guilty of
forging letters in S. Bernard's name for the sake of gain, and
twice made counterfeits of his seals (S. Bern, ad Eugen. Ep.
284 and 298). The sermon on our Lord's Nativity (p. 233),
in which he professes to have taken much from S. Bernard,
and does extract much from S. Bernard's 15th Sermon on the
Canticles, may be his. One also was preached in the Convent
of Arrimarum, where he was a monk, before he went to Clair-
vaux. Of this, he omitted the Preface, which stands in it in
the works of S. Peter Damiani, In this very sermon on S.
Sermon, ascribed to S. Bernard, but older. 109
in his mother's womb. For all we, whosoever, from the trans-
gressing mass, enter into the world, draw with us a long coil of
original sin. He Alone is excepted, Who did no sin, "Whom the
chamber of the virgin's womb, unknowing of man, poured upon
the earth. For, far otherwise than we and in mode unlike, was
He conceived, the Holy Spirit inundating and cleansing the
Virgin with all His Majesty, — He Who overpassed the wont of
the flesh, the order of nature, the commingling of man ! For
so it was meet, that He Who took away sin should not know
sin, should take ' the likeness of flesh of sin,' but not flesh of
sin. Thus since all 'are conceived in iniquities,' we do not
read that any mortal was sanctified in his mother's womb,
except Jeremiah and John Baptist. Although there is no
doubt either as to that singular Virgin, but that she, when
fenced in by her mother's womb, was cleansed by a sublimer
kind of sanctification, as being that sanctuary, in which God,
John Baptist, he retains what Mabillon noticed, as a note of
time, the sentence that " the Church has received the Nativity
of no man, save of God only, to her citadel of authority, ex-
cepting his [S. John B.] only." But the Nativity of the B. V.
was kept in S. Bernard's time (Ep. 86 and 174), and, which
is inconsistent, Nic. of 01. has a sermon on it in this collection.
Yet the addition " et Matri Dei," which was to adapt it
to later times, and which occurs in the Sermon in S. Peter
Damiani's works (Serm. 44, de S. Viet.), does not occur in
Tissier, any more than in the different editions of S. Bernard,
Paris 1609, 1640, 1642, &c. If then the sermon were his, it
must have been, that he took a statement like those of S.
Augustine, carelessly. Yet the ostentatious way in which he
writes to the Count, — " I send to your Glory nineteen sermons,
&c., invented of my own thoughts, dictated by my own pen,
except that, in a few places, I took something from the thoughts
of others, for, still, according to the philosopher, ' alienas sarcinas
adoro.' All these things I dictated in my greener age, before
my pen [style] was laid up in the sheath of silence and lost its
splendour and acumen," — the more indisposes me to believe
him,
170 S. Bernard, Ep. to Canons of Lyons, genuine;
the Son of God, was to take flesh. But the sanctification of
Jeremiah was far less than John's. Jeremiah is known to have
been sanctified in his mother's womb ; John to have been filled
with the Holy Ghost. There [in Jeremiah] sanctification means
cleansing ; here [in John] filling means inundating. — But it is
far more excellent to be filled with the Holy Ghost, than to be
sanctified. Observe diligently, with how well ordered an
arrangement that manifold Spirit sanctifies Jeremiah, fills
John, and Mary. The sanctification of Jeremiah is wonder-
ful, because, although he was conceived in sin, he is born
without sin. For, before he came forth from the belly, he
was sanctified. Nor could lie be born not holy, who was
sanctified in his mother's womb. Wondrous thing, unknown
in past ages ! A man conceived in sins, be born without sin !
But a far more glorious power filled John, who was both sanc-
tified from sin and so overflowed by the Holy Spirit, that he
should go forth, both cleansed and filled [with the Holy Ghost].
Truly great before the Lord was he, whom an Angel announces,
God sanctifies, the Spirit fills, his life commends. For in a
more ineffable manner came He upon ana1 into the Virgin
(supervenit in), whom the whole fulness of Divinity over-
poured without measure, that she might receive Him wholly,
"Who made the whole, so that she is believed not only to have
been washed from sins and filled with the Holy Ghost, but also
to have conceived of the Holy Ghost, because ' what was born
in her, is of the Holy Ghost.' Hence the Catholic faith con-
fesses that, by a singular prerogative, the Son of God was born
of a Yirgin, conceived of the Holy Ghost. — Thou seest by what
higher privilege He, Who was ' fairer than the children of men,'
was severed in His Conception from the children of men.
For they were conceived of sins and in sins ; He in the Spirit
and of the Holy Spirit."
70. S. Bernard (about A.D. 1140), in his cele-
brated Epistle to the Canons of Lyons fi, blames
6 Perrone mentions some, who (as has been so common
in controversy) called the Epistle supposititious. He himself
says, " But Theophilus Eaynaud in his Dipt. Mariana (Opp. T.
blames novelty of keeping F. of the Conception. 171
them for the innovation of celebrating the feast
of the Conception, then denies that it should be
held, because the Conception was not holy, like the
Nativity. He introduces the blame by praise :
" r Especially in ecclesiastical offices, it [the Church of
Lyons] was never seen hastily to acquiesce in sudden novelties,
nor did a Church full of judgment allow itself at any time to
be disfigured by youthful levity. "Whence I greatly marvel that,
at this time, some of you should have thought good to change
this excellent hue, by introducing a new festival, which the
ritual of the Church knows not of, reason approves not, ancient
tradition recommends not. Are we more learned or more
vii. p. 48. Lugd.), candidly acknowledges that this Epistle,
above the rest, must be accounted a genuine production of the
holy Doctor. He writes, ' Unless we decide to pronounce none
of S. Bernard's Epistles to be his, we are absolutely forbidden to
attribute this (which, most of all, savours of S. Bernard) to
any other, as his genuine production.' " P. i. c. 1. fin. note v.
Passaglia assumes its genuineness (P. iii. n. 1652 *sqq.), and
quotes, as explaining it, equally on the assumption of its
genuineness, Bellarm., Greg, de Valent., Er. Bivar, Aug.
Manrique, Ben. Piazza. A. Ballerini labours at great length
to take it from S. Bernard, and ascribes it to his dishonest
scribe, Nicolas of Clairvaux, a worthless but plausible
hypocrite (Syll. Diss. ii. pp. 743 — 823). It seems to me
an intense paradox, to maintain that an Epistle should have
been always believed to have been written by such a man,
upon such a subject, to such a body as the Canons of
Lyons, and that, within 20 years after his decease (see below
Peter of Celles), and thenceforth, being itself of such recent
date, should have been cited undoubtingly as his by Albertus
Magnus, Alex, de Hales, S. Bonaventura, S. Thomas Aquinas,
that it should have been ascribed to him in all MSS., and yet
have been forged by one, who had no temptation to forge it.
7 Ep. 174, ad Canon. Lugd. Opp. i. 169 sqq.
172 S. Bernard, Nativity of the B. V. eminently
devout than the Fathers ? Perilously we venture upon any
thing which their prudence in such things passed over. Nor
is it of such sort, that, unless it ought to be passed over, it
could have escaped altogether the diligence of the Fathers.
" But, you say, l greatly to be honoured is the Mother of the
Lord.' Good is your admonition; but 'the honour of the
Queen i loveth judgment.' The royal virgin needeth not false
honour, having accumulated titles of true honour. — Honour
her unimpaired virginity, her holiness of life ; admire fruitful-
ness in a virgin, venerate her Divine Child. Extol her who
knew not concupiscence in conceiving, or, in bearing, pain.
Extol her, as an object of reverence to Angels, longed for by
the Gentiles, foreknown by Patriarchs and prophets, elect out
of all, preferred to all. Magnify her who found grace, was a
mediatress of salvation, a restorer of worlds ; exalt her who is
exalted above the choirs of Angels to the heavenly kingdom.
The Church chants this of her, and has taught me to chant it.
What I have received from her, I fearlessly hold and deliver;
what I have not, I own I should admit with difficulty.
"I have received from the Church, that that day should be
kept with greatest veneration, whereon, taken from an evil
world, she brought festivities of most solemn joys even into
the heavens. Tea, I have learned in the Church too and from
the Church, to keep the birth of the Virgin unhesitatingly fes-
tive and holy ; most firmly believing with the Church, that she
received in the womb, that she should come forth holy. And
of Jeremiah I read, that, before he went forth, he was sanc-
tified ; and of John Baptist I think no otherwise, who from the
womb felt the Lord in the womb. Consider you also whether
this may not be thought of holy David, since he said to God,
' In Thee have I been strengthened from the womb ; from my
mother's belly Thou art my protector.' And ' Thou art my
God from my mother's belly ; leave me not.' And to Jeremiah
it was so said, ' Before I formed thee in the womb, I knew
thee ; and before thou shouldest go forth from the womb, I
sanctified thee.' How beautifully the Divine oracle distin-
guished between the fashioning in the womb and the bearing
from the womb, showing that the one was foreknown only, the
holy ; not her Conception. 1 73
other [the birth] was foreadorned also with the gift of holiness,
lest any one should think that the prerogative of the Prophet
was to be accounted of foreknowledge or predestination alone.
" But be it, that we grant this of Jeremiah. What shall be
answered of John Baptist, of whom the Angel foreannounced
that he should be filled with the Holy Ghost, when yet in his
mother's womb ? I deem not, that this can be referred to predes-
tination or foreknowledge. For the words of the Angel, as he
himself foretold, were without doubt fulfilled in their season, and
we may not believe, that he, of whom he foresaid that he should
be filled with the Holy Ghost, was not so filled ; and that, in
the place and time which he predicted. But most certainly the
Holy Ghost sanctified whom He filled. But how far this very
sanctification availed against original sin, either for him or for
that Prophet, or if any other was prevented by the like grace,
I would not rashly affirm. Yet I would not hesitate to call
them sanctified whom God sanctified, or to say that they came
forth from the womb with that same sanctification which they
received in the womb, and that the guilt which they derived in
conception did not any way avail to hinder or tear from their
nativity the blessing already bestowed. But who should say
that he, who was filled with the Holy Ghost, still remained
nevertheless a child of wrath, and, if he had died in the womb
with this fulness of the Spirit, should have undergone the pains
of damnation ? It is hard. Yet I would not dare to define
any thing hereon of my own mind. But, however that be, the
Church, which judges and proclaims 'precious' not the nativity
but 'the death of the other ' saints,' does, with good reason, by
a singular exception, honour with festive joys and venerates
Ms birth, of whom, by the message, it is said especially, 'And
many shall rejoice in his birth.' For why should not his exit be
holy, and so, festive and glad, who could exult even in the womb ?
" What then, it is certain, was bestowed even upon a few
mortals, we may not suspect to have been denied to so great
a Virgin, through whom all mortality emerged to life. Beyond
all doubt, the mother of the Lord too was holy before she was
born ; nor is the Holy Church deceived, accounting the very
day of her Nativity holy, and yearly celebrating it with votive
174 S. Bernard held alleged revelation cheap;
celebration, with the exultation of the whole earth. I suppose
that a more copious blessing of sanctification also descended
upon her, which should not only sanctify her birth, but also
keep all her life thenceforth free from sin. Which is not believed
to have been granted to any other among those born of women.
It was fitting that the Queen of virgins, by a privilege of sin-
gular sanctity, should pass her life without any sin, who, by
bearing the Destroyer of death and sin, should obtain for all
the gift of life and righteousness. Holy then was the birth, be-
cause immense sanctity, going forth from the womb, made it
holy.
" What should we think is to be added yet to these honours?
They say, ' that the conception, which went before the honoured
birth, should be honoured, because, had that not preceded, this
which is honoured had not been.' What if another, for the
same reason, should assert that festive honours should be paid
to both her parents also ? Nay, some one might, for a like
reason, ask the same as to grandfathers, and their fathers, and
so it would go ad infinitum, and there would be no limit to fes-
tivals. This thronging of joys belongs to our home, not to our
exile ; and these numerous festivals are meet for citizens, not
for exiles. But they say, 'a writing is produced of a revelation
from above.' As though any one could not equally produce a
writing, in which the Virgin should seem to command the same
as to her parents too, according to the command of the Lord,
1 Honour thy father and thy mother.' I, for my part, easily
satisfy myself not to be moved by such writings, which reason
is not found to supply, nor any certain authority to favour.
For what consequence hath it, that because conception pre-
ceded a holy birth, therefore it too should be accounted holy ?
Because it preceded it, did it also make it holy ? Although it
preceded that it should le, it did not, that it should be holy.
For whence had itself that holiness which it should transmit
to what was to follow ? Was there not rather need, that since
the conception preceded without holiness, she, being conceived,
should be sanctified, that a holy birth might follow ? Did the
earlier borrow holiness from the later ? That sanctification,
which was wrought in her when already conceived, could pass
held opposite opinion to be error. 175
over to the Nativity which followed ; it could not by any means
return backward to the conception which had preceded.
" Where then is the holiness of the conception ? Is she said
to have been prevented by sanctification, in such wise that she
should be conceived already holy, and thereby that her conception
too should be holy, as she is said to have been already sanctified
in the womb, that a holy Nativity might follow? But she
could not be holy before she was," &c.
On this, follows the dogmatic statement already
quoted8. S. Bernard speaks of the doctrine held
by the Canons of Lyons as " an error," which he
had " before found in some," but, he says, " I over-
looked it, sparing a devotion which came from a
simple heart and a love for the Virgin. But when
the superstition was discovered among wise men
and in a celebrated and noble Church, of which I
am especially a son, I know not whether I could
pass it by without grave scandal even to you all."
S. Bernard closed the Epistle by declaring his
readiness to correct his opinion by the judgment
of the Koman Church.
8 Seeabove, pp. 53, 54. The following words were omitted as
not bearing upon the immediate subject, for which it was quoted
there — "Lastly, I read that the Holy Ghost came into her, not
with her, since the Angel says, l the Holy Ghost shall super-
vene into thee.' And if I may speak, what the Church thinks,
(and she thinks truly,) I say that the glorious one conceived of
the Holy Ghost, but that she was not so conceived also ; I say
that she, a virgin, bare, but was not borne also by a virgin.
Else where will be the prerogative of the mother of the Lord,
by which she is believed alone to exult both in the gift of off-
spring and in virginity, if you concede the same to her mother
too ? This is not to honour the virgin, but to detract from her
honour."
176 S. Bern. ; B. V. derived stai7i, but cleansed.
S. Bernard's Epistle had so much weight after-
wards, and, since the tide turned, has been so much
canvassed, that I thought it best to set down all
which bore on the doctrine.
The same teaching appears in two sermons of S.
Bernard on the Assumption of the B. V., which
contain strong passages about her present preroga-
tives.
"9Far be it, that this house [the B.V.] should have any
defilement of its own, so that in it the broom of Lazarus
[penitence] should be required. But though she derived the
original stain from her parents, yet Christian piety prohibits
our believing, that she was less sanctified in the womb than
Jeremiah, or not more filled with the Holy Ghost than John ;
for neither would she be honoured at her birth with festival
praises, if she were not born holy. Lastly, since it is altogether
clear, that Mary was cleansed by grace alone from the original
contagion, inasmuch as now too, in Baptism, grace alone washes
away this stain, and the sharp stone of circumcision alone
scraped it formerly, if, as is altogether pious to believe, Mary
had no sin of her own, none the less penitence too was absent
from her most innocent heart."
" 10 None the less bright is also that new mode of conception,
that not in iniquity, as all the rest, but through the super-
vening of the Holy Spirit and from sanctification alone [i. e. the
hallowing presence of God the Holy Ghost] Mary alone con-
ceived." He does not except S. Anne.
71. Hugo a S. Victore (A.D. 1120) contrasts the
sinless Flesh of Jesus with that of Mary, which was
in her subject to sin, which He cleansed by taking
it
9 In Ass. B. M. Serm. ii. n. 8. p. 1005. Ben.
10 Serm. inf. oct. Ass. B. M. V. n. 9. p. 1015.
Hugo a S. V., Xt took Mary* s flesh of sin clean. 177
" ' The definition of the Catholic truth asserts that the Son
of God (Who was born for sinners and of sinners) took, from
flesh subject to sin, Flesh free from sin; and therefore free
from sin, because freed ; therefore free, not because It was
never under it, but because It ceased at some time to be under
it. "When It was taken, It was cleansed. By the same grace
was human nature cleansed, that it might be united to the
Word of God free from sin, whereby a Christian is freedfrom sin,
that he may be united to that same Nature in Christ, his Head.
By grace it was effected that that flesh should be cleansed from
sin, under which it was from its origin ; and, being cleansed in
Him, Who in it was to be free from all sin, should be taken
free from sin ; so that neither should grace prejudice the concep-
tion of nature, nor the conception of nature hinder grace."
The explanation, over against which Hugo a
S. Victore sets this "definition of the Catholic truth,"
the more illustrates the difficulty, because it is itself
so patently unnatural and unauthorized. The ques-
tion was, how our Lord was exempted from original
sin, concerning which there could have been no
difficulty at all, had there been any clear tradition
that the B. V. had been so exempted.
" 2 Many inquire as to that Flesh, which the Word assumed,
in what way It was clean from sin ; and, in what way, without
sin, It bare the punishment of sin. And in regard to that, in what
way It was either clean, or cleansed, from sin, we ought not to
withhold the opinion of some — although it seemeth not, that it
is [so] ; it is believed, that it is not. Some think that that Flesh
which was taken by the Word, was in such wise, from the be-
ginning and in our first parents, kept free from the contagion
and corruption of sin, when the whole mass of human nature
1 De Sacram. L. ii. p. 1. c. 5. Opp. iii. 590.
2 Ib. p. 589.
M
178 Hugo d S. V., Xt 's flesh in Mary subject to sin.
was corrupted by sin, and that It was so transmitted, from the
first parent himself down to Its assumption by the Word, free
from all sin and clean, that It was never under sin. and there-
fore was, not freed from sin but, free, Tor they say, that
that part of human nature, through Which human nature itself
was to be freed from sin, when it was held bound to sin, ought
not to be itself under sin."
His own belief he expresses again ;
" 8 In regard to that Flesh, to which the Word was united, it
is inquired, whether that Flesh was before, in Mary, subject to
sin. Augustine says, that it was4, but, in the very act of sever-
ance, was cleansed by the Holy Ghost both from sin and the
fomes of sin. But Mary He cleansed wholly from sin, not from
thefomes of sin, which [fomes] He yet so weakened, that there-
after she is believed not to have sinned." [For this exemption
from actual sin, he quotes S. Augustine's celebrated passage 5.]
" But if the flesh of Christ, in Mary and in others from whom
It descended, was subject to sin, how shall that be solved, ' Levi
was decimated in Abraham?' S. Augustine solves it thus.
Levi was decimated in Abraham, because he descended from him
through concupiscence ; but Christ was not decimated in him,
because He did not descend from him through concupiscence.
But did not the same flesh descend into both David and Mary
through concupiscence ? But not the Flesh of Christ: for this
would be to say that it had descended into Christ by concu-
piscence : which is utterly false. Some choose to say, that as
that portion [of flesh] was clean and holy in Adam before sin,
so also, after sin, it was preserved in him and in all his suc-
3 Summa sententiar. Tract, i. c. 16. Opp. iii. 432.
4 In the edition Rouen 1648, there is a note on this section.
" Here he speaks, according to the common opinion of Ms time,
when the Church had not yeb denned that we must think
differently."
6 See above, p. 67.
Eadmer, Herve of Dot. 179
cessors in a straight line down to Mary. And this they say
they have from Gregory."
72. Eadmer, S. Anselm's disciple, (A. D. 1121,)
imitates S. Anselm in the work " on the excellency
of the Virgin Mary," which R. C. books of devotion
still quote as S. Anselm's.
" ° We hold that by faith her heart was so cleansed from all,
if aught yet of original or actual sin remained over, that the
Spirit of Grod wholly ' rested upon her, being humble and still
and trembling at His words,' accepted her more sweetly than
any holocaust, obeying with most chaste and simple heart the
will of the Lord, and from her, overshadowed with the virtue of
the Most High, incorporated the Son of Grod."
73. The words in Herve of Dol, A. D. 1130, as
to the universality of original sin and death through
that sin, are so strong, that some scribe, who be-
lieved in the immaculate Conception, inserted the
words " unless she had been exempted by God," and
" excepting the Mother of God," to correct the
supposed mistake 7. I doubt not but that he did it
in good faith, in the same way as incomplete state-
8 De Excell. B. V. M. c. 3. p. 136. ad calc. Opp. S. Anselmi.
7 Grerberon, the celebrated Benedictine editor of S. An-
selm, pointed out, in his " Censnra operum S. Anselmi,"
prefixed to his works, that the words " nisi divinitus exempta
fuisset," and "dempta Matre Dei," had been added, as Estius,
he adds, had suspected. "Ex cujus [cod. MS. qui penes nos
est] etiam fide certo liquet 'has clausulas, 'nisi divinitus
exempta fuisset' et 'dempta Matre Dei,' esse ab alio insertas,
ut Estius fuerat jam subodoratus, Hsec cnim in MS. minime
leguntur." § censura libri De Conceptione B. V.
M 2
180 Herve of Dol, ungrammatical interpolations
ments of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity have
been, here .and there, filled up in MSS. of St.
Augustine. Still the correction brings out only
the more the force of the original; so that, whereas
Perrone quotes it8, with the additions, in proof
of the belief in the exemption of the B. V., it shows
that, in the natural meaning of the words, Herve
included her as involved in the consequences of
Adam's sin.
" • If One, Christ, died for all, i. e. that all might live, then it
must needs be, that all died in soul through sin, whose vivifying
was sought by the Death of One, "Who Alone was without sin,
nor could be partaker of the death of the soul. — All men died
for sins, no one whatever being excepted1, whether original
or sins added by the will, whether in ignorance or knowing
and not doing what is just. And for all so dead, One, Christ,
died, i. e. having absolutely no sin, "Who Alone was a sufficient
sacrifice for the sins of all," &c.
" a He sent Him ' in the likeness of flesh of sin,' not as though
He were not flesh, but because He was Flesh, yet c flesh of
sin ' He was not. For our flesh is flesh of sin, because it is
generated through use of passion. For His Flesh alone was
not flesh of sin, because His mother conceived Him, not
through concupiscence, but through grace. Tet there was
* likeness of flesh of sin,' i. e. passible and mortal, which could
be nourished and hunger and thirst and sleep and be fatigued
and die. For death and weakness are only from sin. And
8 1. c. p. 321. Perrone prints in capitals, the words which
G-erberon avers, and Estius suspected to have been interpolated.
9 On 2 Cor. v. 14 in S. Anselm's Opp. ii. 196. ed. Col. 1612.
1 The words "dempta Matre Dei" are interpolated here.
Had Herve meant to make the exception, he would not have
done so in this form, with the double ablative absolute.
On Eom. viii. 3. Ib. ii. 48.
to change his doctrine. 181
indeed that Body was mortal and weak, as the bodies of others.
The flesh of sin hath death and sin, but ' the likeness of flesh of
sin ' had death without sin. If it had sin, it would be flesh of
sin. If it had not death, it would not be ' likeness of flesh of
sin.' Such the Saviour came, and from sin condemned sin in
the flesh itself, that our spirit, burning with the love of things
eternal, might not be led captive to the consent of passion. For
Adam did not deserve death except by sinning, and Christ took
on Him mortal flesh. So then death is called ' sin,' in that it
came from sin, as we speak of ' the Latin tongue/ ' the Greek
tongue,' not meaning the member itself of the flesh, but what
comes through the member of the flesh. So then the sin of
the Lord is what resulted from sin, because He thence took
flesh from that very mass which had deserved death from sin.
And to speak more concisely, Mary from Adam died for sin 3,
and the flesh of the Lord from Mary died to efface sin."
74. Peter Lombard, A.D. 1141, affirms that the
flesh of our Lord was in Mary subject to sin, but
was purified by the Holy Ghost, previous to His as-
suming it, and that thenceforth she was freed from
the " fomes " of sin too.
" 4 It may be said and ought to be believed, according to the
concurrent attestation of the Saints, that It [the Flesh of the
Word before It was conceived] was subject to sin, as well as
the other flesh of the Virgin, but, by the operation of the Holy
Ghost, was so cleansed, as to be united to the "Word free from
all contagion of sin, the penalty remaining, not of necessity but
8 The words "nisi divinitus cxempta esset" are interpolated
here. They are also ungrainrnatical. For Herve says, using
S. Augustine's words, that Mary did die, as a fact ; with which
the words, " unless she had been exempted by God," do not
cohere. The whole passage also, from, "So then death is
called," &c., is S. Augustine's. See above, p. 100.
4 Sent. iii. Dist. iii.
182 P. Lombard, wondrous Flesh of Christ
by the Will of Him Who took it. Mary too, the Holy Spirit,
forecoming into her, cleansed altogether from sin, either by
entirely evacuating the ' femes ' itself, as some think, or by so
weakening and extenuating it, that she had afterwards no occa-
sion of sin. But that thenceforth the Holy Virgin was free
from all sin, Aug. evidently shows, saying in his book on
Nature and Grace, 'Except the Virgin Mary, &c.5"'
And,
" Since that Flesh, whose singular excellence cannot be
expressed in words, was, before it was united with the Word,
subject to sin in Mary6 and in others from whom it was trans-
mitted by propagation, it may seem not unreasonably to have
been subject to sin in Abraham, whose whole flesh was subject
to sin. Although Christ was there, [in the loins of Abraham,]
yet He did not descend thence according to the common law,
viz. through passion of the flesh ; as in Adam too all sinned,
but not Christ. Whence Aug. on Genesis says, 'As when
Adam sinned, they who were in his loins sinned, so, when
Abraham gave tithes, they who were in his loins were tithed.'
But this does not follow in Christ, although He was in the
loins both of Adam and Abraham, in that He did not descend
thence by concupiscence of the flesh. Wherefore Christ is
said rightly to have taken the first-fruits of our mass, because
He took not ' flesh of sin,' but ' the likeness of flesh of sin.'
For God sent His Son, as the Apostle said, c into the likeness of
flesh of sin.' For the Word took flesh like to sinful flesh in
penalty and not in fault, and therefore not sinful. But all the
6 See above, pp. 67 — 69.
6 This is the reading in Pet. Lombard, ed. Venice, 1477,
ed. Paris, 15G4 (revised by Job. Aleaume, Div. Prof, at Paris) ;
Lovan. 1568 (three MSS. collated) ; Lugd. 1570. This read-
ing, which De B. also has, is obviously right, both on the
authority of the editions, and from the " aliisque." My edition
of S. Thomas (Antw. 1612) has in P. Lombard's text "materia."
The error, I suppose, arose from t^e dread of connecting sin,
with the B, V.
subject to sin in Mary. 183
other flesh of men is 'flesh of sin;' His alone is not 'flesh of
sin,' because His mother conceived Him, not by concupiscence,
but by grace. Yet hath He ' the likeness of flesh of sin,' by
liability to suffering and death ; because He was hungry, and
athirst, and the like. Although then His Flesh is the same as
ours, It was not formed in the womb, as was onrs. For It was
sanctified in the womb and born without sin ; neither did He
Himself ever sin in it. In the penalty then It was like our
flesh ; not in the quality of sin, because It had not at all that
pollution which is conceived from the motion of concupiscence,
nor was It born of carnal delight."
75. Porree, Bishop of Poitiers, A.D. 1141, in his
explanation of the treatise of Boethius, " on the Two
Natures of Christ," brings out, as confessed on both
sides, the exemption of Christ Alone from original
sin, and the difficulty raised thereon by the Euty-
chians.
" 7From these [Adam and Eve] and subsequently from male
and female, original concupiscence ministering, was generated
whoever was generated beside Christ. But Christ Himself
was made Man, original concupiscence not ministering, but
ineffable and inscrutable Divine grace alone operating."
" 8 If any say, that Christ was not Very Man, because, after
the sin of our first parents, He was held by no necessity of
dying, or that, before His resurrection, He was not such as
the blessed will be after the common resurrection of all, be-
cause He suffered, this does not follow. For He was not born
of male and female by the law of sin, i. e. human concupiscence
ministering. Therefore He is not held by original guilt, nor
by any necessity of sinning or suffering, either before or after
His Passion; but, as of His own Will He was made flesh, so, of
T In Lib. iv. Boeth. de duabus Naturis et Una Persona Christi,
n Boethii Opp. p. 1255,
Ib. p. 1257,
184 Porree answers Eutychians on Xtfs sinlessness.
His own Will, He both suffered and rose again, and shall abide
thenceforth without passion."
"'According to him [Eutyches] (if this was his opinion)
there was not assumed in the Incarnation of Christ the sick
man, i. e, the human substance, which, in our first parents and
thenceforward in all generated from them by concupiscence,
was held bound by original guilt, and, being weak through the
original fault, suffered by passions."
" l They say thus, ' If the Body of Christ was taken from
man (as you Catholics believe), but every man, as you say,
from the first transgression, i. e. that of our first parents, was
not only held by sin, so that he in act did what ought not to
be done, and was necessarily dissolved by death, but was en-
tangled, by a sort of necessity, in affections of sin, (this being
the punishment of the sin of the first parents, that, being held
subject to death, he should be guilty through a certain will of
sinning,) why in Christ, Who took such a body, was there
neither will nor act of sin ?"
" 2 From this it may be understood, how, although the Body
of Christ was taken from man, and every man was, from the
first transgression, held both by sin and death, yet in Him was
no sin nor any will to sin, and, not sinning, He yet tasted
death, which is the punishment of sin."
76. f " Odo, Cistercian, of great reputation for
much religion and learning, Abbot of Muris-
mundi3," in the Diocese of Milan, Bishop of
Frisingen, A.D. 1138 4:
" 5 Lo, it is said of her, l she stood,' and not incongruously ;
9 Ib. p. 1258. ' Ib. p. 1273. 2 Ib. p. 1273.
3 Turr. 4 Samarthani Gall. Christ, iv. 816.
5 "In a most devout homily on the Gospel, * Stabat juxta
crucem,' beginning ' Sicut Christian® religiouis defectus.' ':
Turr. P. vi. c. 26. f. 116. v. De Alva said that the sermon had
not been found, u. 221. p. 641.
Odo, Richard a S. Victor. 185
for from what time she was sanctified in the womb from the
siii contracted bv origin [originaliter], she remained thence-
forth free from all sin. "Whence that same excellent Doctor
Augustine saith, 'When the question is of sins, &c.' "
77. The statements of Richard of S. Victor, A.D.
1150, are the more difficult to give concisely, be-
cause of the mystical exposition of Holy Scripture,
which he combines with the literal interpretation
of the prophecy, " A Virgin shall conceive and
bear a Son." He dwells largely and glowingly on
the glories of the Blessed Virgin in the Incarna-
tion. But he insists throughout upon her having
been cleansed ; cleansed, he says, by the over-
shadowing of the Holy Ghost, previous to the In-
carnation, and by the Incarnation Itself. Our
Lord Alone could say, " without sin did My mother
conceive Me;" He was clean from His Conception;
she was cleansed by His Conception, and thence-
forth the "fomes" too of sin was extinguished in her,
so that she had thenceforth no temptation to sin.
" 6 There is a threefold promise according to the threefold
loss — Observe therein a threefold sign ; the first, ' A Virgin
shall conceive and bear a Son;' the second, 'And His Name
shall be called Emmanuel;' the third, 'Butter and honey
shall He eat, that He may know to refuse the evil and to
choose the good.' You have then one sign in the Mother,
two in the Child ; a sign of iucorruption in the mother ; a sign
of recovering dignity and completeness in the Child."
" 7 Hear as to the Mother, ' Behold a Virgin shall conceive
0 De Emmanuele, i. 11.
7 Ib. 12.
186 Richard d S. Viet., the flesh cleansed in
and bear a Son.' How great thinkest thou this to be ? — Since
the world was, it has not been heard, that a virgin conceived, a
virgin bare, and, after giving birth, remained inviolate. Human
nature then received a sort of earnest or first-fruits of its
future incorruptibility, the integrity of the virginal uncor-
ruptedness. "Why, I ask, do we not in this life live without
corruption, but because human nature is not sown without
corruption ? The root of our corruptibility begins to germinate
from the very hour of our conception. But behold in the
Blessed Virgin 8 it is anticipated there whence it seemed to
germinate. And we know that, when the root is cut off, all
fructifying therefrom is dried up. ' Behold,' he says, ' a Virgin
shall conceive and bear a Son.' In that it is said, ' a Virgin
shall conceive,' ' a Virgin shall bear,' it is shown plainly, that
both shall be clean, both the flesh which generates, and the
Flesh generated. The Son then of this birth could Alone in
this respect ' sing a new song unto the Lord,' ' "Without
iniquities was I conceived, and without sins did My mother
conceive Me.' It is therefore plain that He came for the
destruction of sin, "Who, in His very entrance into the world,
did not bring with Him any stain of sin from His mother's
flesh, but destroyed it. If then His Conception Alone availed
to destroy the c fomes ' of concupiscence and the whole root of
corruption, what, I pray, could His Nativity, His humility,
circumcision, conversation, patience, obedience, Passion, Cruci-
fixion, avail to the expiation of His Body ? If what was done
in one hour, yea rather in a little portion of one hour, was of
such avail, what could so many years avail, employed on the
mystery of our redemption ? He Who could, at the time of
His Conception, through the infusion of His grace, cleanse His
mother's bowels, why should He not be believed to be able to
cleanse those who willed to be partakers of the same grace,
when and how He willed ? "Why should He not be believed to
be able to cleanse that nature in each one of us, which in the
Blessed Virgin He could not duly cleanse, but honour too and
3 i. e. in her Conception of her Son, in a way different from
that, by which sin is transmitted,
the R M., clean in Christ. 187
glorify ? Tor He glorified her, in that He gave her something
above nature. He did in her something which was against
nature, something according to nature, something above nature.
It was against the infirmity of our nature, that a virgin con-
ceived. It was according to nature, that He was conceived in
the womb and formed, and at length born, according to the
regular period of birth. Above the nature, not only of our
infirmity, but also above that of our first creation was it, that
a virgin conceived without seed of man. It belonged to purity,
that she could generate without concupiscence ; to honour, that
she bare a Son Who was pure from all contagion of sin ; to glory,
that she conceived, not of man, but of the Holy Spirit."
" 9 And as it is believed as to the inferior sex in the Virgin,
that time was when she could sin, and time was when she did
not fear to sin ; so in the first state of being, every elect until
death fears to fall, after death he fears not at all the fall of sin.
And as the stronger sex in Christ could not at all sin ; so, in
the second state, man for ever shall not fear to sin. And it
must be observed in the Mother and her Offspring, that in the
Mother the flesh was cleansed ; in the Offspring, it was not
cleansed, but clean : in her it was purged ; in Him it was pure.
So in the first state our nature is purged ; in the second, it is
found wholly pure. The first is of purification and sanctifica-
tion ; the second, of purity and glorifying. We have then in
the Mother the sign of our purification and sanctification ; we
have in the Offspring the sign of our future purity and glorify-
ing. Yet we may note in the Virgin Mother alone the sign of
each state ; the sign of our purification, when she yet had some-
thing, which ought to be cleansed ; the sign of our purity,
when, after the overshadowing of the Holy Ghost, she abode in
her purity, the c fomes' of sin being extinguished."
" ' Estimate, if 3'ou can, what and how great is that magni-
ficence, that the Child of the Virgin should receive all fulness
from the hour of His Conception, and in the truth of His
Humanity possess the fulness of Divinity. Singular glory,
singular grace too of the Blessed Virgin Mary, who bare,
• Ib, ' lb. ii, 25,
188 Rich, a Viet., B. V. cleansed for Incarnation.
retaining the honour of virginity, and bare — not an ordinary
son but — God. Well was it said, well shall it be said, * Blessed
art thou among women, and blessed is the Fruit of thy womb.1
0 what a Fruit ! Fruit, how magnificent ! glorious Fruit !
desirable Fruit ! sublime Fruit ! Thou recallest, I doubt
not, what thou readest iu the Prophet, ' In that day, the Branch
of the Lord shall be for beauty and glory, and the Fruit of the
earth be for majesty.' And whence came this to our earth,
that it could produce such Fruit ? " " 2 Certainly, the Blessed
Virgin Mary was earth according to the flesh then too, when
the Angel said to her, ' Hail, full of grace, behold thou shalt
conceive and bear a Son.' "Without doubt, then too was she
earth according to the flesh, and was returning to the earth ; she
was earth through her liability to death, and was going to earth
through death. Whence then could such earth bear such Fruit?
But it is absolutely certain, that unless she had been fully
cleansed, she could not produce such and so sublime a Fruit.
To say more plainly what I have said, unless she had been
utterly cleansed from all contagion of sin, she could not give
birth to God, the Son of God. For that a virgin should con-
ceive, a virgin bear, there was need of the highest purity."
" 3 To the Virgin, then, believing but inquiring how this was
to be, it was duly answered by the Angel, ' The Holy Ghost
shall come upon thee, and the Power of the Highest shall over-
shadow thee.' As though it were said to her plainly, * That
thou mayest be made meet for such a sacrament, and mayestbe
found fit, the Power of the Highest shall overshadow thee,
both to extinguish all concupiscence and to enlighten all igno-
rance.' ' " <4 Before He shall know,' as though he said more
plainly, ' Before Emmanuel shall be conceived in His mother,'
' the earth ' of our created nature, out of which ' truth springs,'
shall be freed from the twofold root of all sins." " You see
that that remained in the Virgin which was to punishment;
that departed, which was to fault. Vitiosity departed ; pcenality
remained. How marvellous, how stupendous, that her Son, the
Fount itself of pitying love, allowed His mother who was
2 Ib. 26. * Ib. 27. 4 Ib. 28.
Zacharias of Chrys. Peter of Celle. 189
fully cleansed from all faults to toil under the yoke of our
captivity !"
" 5 From the hour when the Holy Spirit came upon her, from
the hour that the Power of the Highest overshadowed her, the
blessed Virgin Mary was not only consummated in all grace,
but confirmed in every good and gift which she had received.
Our Emmanuel, what had He ever in Him, which ought or
could be burnt up, "Who, receiving all fulness, was from the
very hour of His Conception consummated and confirmed in all
good ? The prophecy then seemeth to be understood of the
Virgin Mary alone. For in her the earth of our miserable
nature obtained full peace from all assaulting of evil."
78. Zacharias, Bishop of Chrysopolis (from Bede),
A.D. 1157,
" 6 We, although we are made holy, are not yet born holy,
since the prophet says, * I was conceived in iniquities.' But
Jesus was born holy, in a way belonging to him Alone [singu-
lariter], because He was not conceived by commingling of carnal
79. Peter of Celle (afterwards, A.D. 1182, Bishop
of Chartres) blamed Nicolas, a monk of S. Alban's,
for keeping the Festival of the Conception, as S.
Bernard did the Canons of Lyons. The corre-
spondence began, probably, soon after S. Bernard's
departure, A.D. 1153 7. Peter treated it as "an
6 Ib. 30.
6 Comm. on Ammonium, concord. Evang. on St. Luke i. 35.
Bibl. P. T. 19. p. 748.
7 The last letter of Peter was, according to Ballerini (Syll.
Diss. ii. 770), written when he was Bishop elect, i. e. A.D. 1181.
(The word " electus " is not prefixed in his L. ix. Ep. 10. B. P.
xxi. 001. Lugd. 1677.) But this was the close of a correspon-
dence, which Peter had resumed upon hearing that Nicolas was
190 Peter of Celle appeals to all before him.
error 8," unsupported by Scripture 9, and appealed
to all before them. He seems to have anticipated
no other objection but that of checking the current
of devotion to the B. V.1, about which he declares
himself equally zealous with Nicolas. Peter says :
" 2 It is a proverb, ' Old ways are not to be left for new.'
Who of the saints, who of the ancients, did not walk on our
path ? I believe and truly confess, that, had they erred
herein, ' God would have revealed this also unto' them. For,
had there been any peril therein, would He have kept silence
on this only towards those, to whom He revealed His counsels
so familiarly, that, even as a supplement to the Gospels,
Epistles, and prophets, they enacted canons and decrees3 to
abide for ever, and to be observed almost with the same reve-
rence as the Gospels ?"
alive, having heard " many years before " (a multis retro annis)
that he was departed. (Epp. vi. 6. Ib. p. 872.) In this he
inquires, " mindful of the kindly, not displeased, altercation,
which we had long ago, whether, amended by this imaginary
death, he had effaced or softened his error, which came not
from ill-feeling, but from a supreme or more than supreme
regard for the Virgin of virgins."
8 Epp. vi. 6, and x. 23, adding, " if it is to be called an error,
which proceeds from piety." Also, L. ix. Ep. 10.
9 " I impugn your phantasies, seducing from an appearance
of beauty, but tottering for want of stable foundation. For
whatever is not supported by the basis of authorities of Scrip-
ture, is stayed by no stable strength." Epp. vi. 23.
1 " But perhaps you will say to me, ' Dare you, a mere
Abbot, to close the wells of a devotion ever to be prolonged,
and of a veneration to be dug daily deeper?' " Epp, vi. 23. p.
879.
2 Epp. vi. 23. Ib. p. 879.
3 Of General Councils, I suppose.
A Story about S. Bernard. 191
Nicolas did not answer this, and spoke of the
Conception as one of those " Articles, which may
be understood either way without injury to the
faith on either side4,'' while he censures Peter
strongly for maintaining, that before the Divine
Conception, she could feel temptation, which she
overcame. Yet he speaks, as if God had revealed
that S. Bernard's Epistle on the Conception
remained as a dark spot on his breast after death,
for which he had to pass, although lightly, through
Purgatory5. Such an account, circulated shortly
4 In Pet. Cell. Epp. ix. 9. init.
5 " I venerate the Bl. Confessor Bernard in such wise, as to
praise and love his holiness, and yet not love or praise his
presumption against the Conception of the Mother of the
Lord. And lest you should think that I say what I say, out
of an obstinate rather than a good conscience, hear what! have
heard from Cistercians themselves, truly religious and loving
the Virgin in truth, about the holy Bernard, whose names I
hide under a bushel, lest I make them odious to the Com-
munity of their brethren. In the monastery of Clairvaux a
very religious lay-brother, in a vision of the night, saw Abbofc
Bernard, clad in snow-white garments, to have a dark spot
upon his breast. Saddened and wondering he asked him, ' What
is it, father, that I see a black spot in thee ?' He, ' Because I
wrote what should not be written about the Conception of our
Lady, I bear in my breast the sign of my purgation.' The
brother made it known to the convent, and a brother reduced
it to writing. It was reported in a general Cistercian Chapter,
and, by common advice, the writing perished in the flames, and
all the Abbots preferred that the glory of the Virgin should be
imperilled, than the estimation [opinionem] of S. Bernard.
Not so Paul, not so ; who calls himself a blasphemer and
injurious, that he might the more extol the glory of the
192 Disparagement of S. Bernard.
after S. Bernard's departure, is surely decisive as
to the fact of S. Bernard's having written as he
wrote, and having meant, what his words express.
It has been thought that the Epistle " on the Con-
ception of the B. V." in S. Anselm's works also
alludes to a check given to the devotion of the
simple by the writing of S. Bernard, with the same
tone of disparagement 6.
Redeemer. And certainly, as I believe, the saint, on that
ground, appeared in his own person to a simple man, who knew
nothing of such matters, and made known his fault, that the
discretion of the whole Cistercian Chapter might learn that he
willed that his error should be condemned, and the glory of
the Conception of the Virgin should be extolled. So, if I pub-
lish, what I believe he wished to be published, this is not to
extenuate his fame, or evacuate his glory, but to express his
will as to his penitence for his offence. But, after a light transit
through purgatory, he entered into the joy of his Lord," &c.
He mentions S. Bernard's having been "lately canonized,"
which was A.D. 1174.
0 " To me, desirous of considering the beginning, whence
the salvation of the world held its course, to-day's solemnity
occurs, which is rendered festive in many places by the Concep-
tion of the Bl. Mother of God " [or, " which is celebrated by some
afc the present time" MS. Cork, one of two MSS.], "and
indeed in old times it was celebrated more commonly, by those
especially, in whom pure simplicity and humble devotion
towards God flourished. But when both greater knowledge
and more influential examination of things imbued and set up
the minds of some, it took away this festival, despising the
simplicity of the poor, and reduced it to nothing, as void of
reason. Whose judgment gained strength, most chiefly because
they who delivered it, were pre-eminent in secular and ecclesias-
tical authority, and abundance of wealth " (in S. Ansel m, Opp.
p, 499. Ben.), The writer has been thought to allude to S.
Comment on the Canticles. 193
If so, he must have alluded to others also, since
he speaks of the " wealth " also of those who op-
posed it.
Potho of Prumium ahout A. D. 1151 used the
words of S. Bernard against the introduction of the
festival, but alluded very lightly to the grounds7.
80. Gulielmus Parvus [i.e. Little or Petit] Neu-
brigensis, Augustinian, dedicated his comment on
the Canticles 8 to Abbot Roger Belloland at whose
request he wrote it, and who lived about A.D. 11709.
He himself died A.D. 1208 at 70. It is a specimen
of other works which have been lost. De Alva
says that " he said clearly and expressly that the
B. V. was conceived in original sin." Del Rio calls
him "acute, learned, pious1."
Del Rio says that he explained "Thou art all
Bernard's words "paucorum simplicitas iraperitorum," "devo-
tioni qusB de simplici corde et amore Virginia veniebat." E'p.
174 fin.
7 " We, in all these things, do not derogate from the devotion
of the faithful, while we seek a reason, by which we ought to
offer to the Lord our reasonable service, lesfc, perhaps deviating
from the right way, we be seduced by a spirit of presumption "
(de domo Dei. L. iii. fin. B. P. xxi. 502). In this he must
allude to the Festival of the Conception alone ; he cannot
allude to the two other festivals, to the unauthorized intro-
duction of which he had objected, the Festival of the Holy
Trinity and the Transfiguration, since in these there could be
no question as to the object of them.
8 It began " Crebrso petitionis tuse." De Alva, n. 133, fin.
Del Bio used it in a MS. of the College of Louvain.
0 Polyd. Virg. Hist. Aug. L. 13. in Del Hio.
1 Isag. in Cant. p. 13.
N
194 Sicardus, against the festival of the Cone.
fair," that "2the B. V. contracted the original con-
tagion from Adam, but was presently sanctified, the
contagion being absorbed."
In the other passage, " One is my Dove," Del
Rio gives a large context, but omits the words in
which Gulielmus expressed his opinion, only saying,
" 3 Gulielmus thinks that she was conceived in ori-
ginal sin, whom I do not follow, holding that she
was preserved; therefore I have changed all this
[ ], and substituted my own."
81. Sicardus, consecrated Bishop of Cremona
A.D. 1185, aof distinguished learning and piety,"
carries on the objection to the celebration of the
Festival, and on the same grounds, which he ex-
presses in the words of John Beleth : —
" 4 Some at one time celebrated the Conception of the B. V.,
and perchance some still celebrate it, on account of a revela-
tion which they say was made to a certain Abbot in a ship-
wreck ; but it is not authentic. Therefore such festival seems
to be to be prohibited 5, because she was conceived in original
sin."
82. I may as well adduce again the passages
2 On Cant. iv. 7. p. 142.
8 On Cant. vi. 8. p. 235.
4 Summa de div. off. (Mitrale) L. ix. c. 43. de Nativ. B. V.
6 " Aliquibus," inserted in the Abbe Migne's Patrologia, is
not in De B. It looks like a correction. De Alva doubted
the existence of the book, and alleged as one of his reasons, the
identity of De B.'s citation with that from John Beleth
(above, p. 167). They are so like, that Sicardus probably had
Beleth's book before him. But then it is the more probable
that the two texts agreed.
Innocent III. "Mary was produced in fault" 195
which I have already given from the works of In-
nocent III., A.D. 1197: —
" ° That one (Eve) was produced without fault, but pro-
duced unto fault ; but this one (Mary) was produced in fault,
but produced without fault. That one was said to be Eva, to
this one was said Ave."
" 7 But forthwith [upon the Angel's words, ' The Holy Grhost
shall come upon thee '] the Holy Ghost came upon her. He
had before come into Jier, when, in her mother's womb, He
cleansed her soul from original sin ; but now too He came
upon her to cleanse her flesh from the ' fomes ' of sin, that
she might be altogether without spot or wrinkle. That tyrant
then of the flesh, the sickness of nature, the 'fomes' of sin, as
I think, He altogether extinguished, that henceforth any mo-
tion from the law of sin should not be able to arise in her
members."
I cannot but think De Alva's interpretation
of the first passage unnatural, viz. that Innocent
meant that " Mary was produced in fault," viz. of
her parents; for, granting that he could have
spoken of an act done to the glory of God, as a
fault, it is contrary to the antithesis. He is speak-
ing of: the original sinlessness of Eve, the common
mother of us all, and the sinful nature of her chil-
dren; and then he contrasts again the Mother and
the Child, the Holy Child born Immaculate, the
mother " produced in fault." In three of the four
cases of this remarkable antithesis, what is spoken
of is the sinfulness or the sinlessness of the being
0 In Solemn. Assump. glor. semper Virg. M. Serm. 2. Opp.
T. i. p. 151. Colon. 1575, quoted Eirenicon, p. 316.
7 In Solemn. Purif. glor. V. M., Serm. Unic. Opp. i. 107,
quoted ibid.
N2
196 Inn. HI., Xt. Alone was conceived wtht. fault.
produced; it seems natural that it should be as to
the fourth also. Innocent draws the like contrast
between the Conception of our Lord, and that of
John Baptist, that "John was conceived in fault,
but Christ Alone was conceived without fault :" —
" 8 Of John the Angel does not speak of the conception but
of the birth. But of Jesus he predicts alike the Birth and the
Conception. Tor to Zachariah the father it is predicted, ' Thy
wife shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call his name John,'
but to Mary the mother it is predicted, ' Behold, thou shalt
conceive in thy womb and bear a Son, and shalt call His Name
Jesus.' For John was conceived in fault, but Christ Alone was
conceived without fault. But each was born in grace, and
therefore the Nativity of each is celebrated, but the Conception
of Christ Alone is celebrated."
The second passage speaks of two purifications,
the one of the soul after her conception, but before
her birth ; the other, of the body too, from the mate-
rial effects of original sin, so that she should have
no emotion which could lead to sin.
Upon the first passage the Abbe Migne adds a
note : " So could Pope Innocent think as to a
matter not as yet defined by the Church, which now
is of faith ;" the second, which yet contains a doc-
trine different apparently from that now established,
he does not notice. But Innocent III., in the pro-
logue to his sermons, implies that they were written
8 Serm. 16. de Sanetis, in fest. Joh. Bapt. i. Baillet, in his
Vies des Saints, Dec. 8, quotes this in proof that the Concep-
tion of the B. V. was not celebrated then at Eome. T. 8. p.
436.
C. SabeliiuS) afterwards Honorius III. 197
while he was Pope, and it is stated in his history9
that they were so preached.
83. De Bandelis (Yincentia and Deza following
him) quotes from fCencius Sabellius (afterwards
Honorius III. A.D. 1216) one passage, exactly
agreeing with the last of Innocent III., and too
characteristic not to be a genuine passage. Cen-
cius Sabellius is known to have written sermons,
which he dedicated to S. Dominic '. I may as well
set down the passage, premising that it was not
written by him as Pope, yet by one in high reputa-
tion with the two Popes before him : —
" 2 This ' Tabernacle,' the Blessed Virgin, the Most Highest
sanctified, because in her mother's womb He cleansed her from
original sin. Tor the Blessed Virgin had this prerogative,
that she was not only cleansed from sin, but was also, after
that, in the Conception of her Sou, freed from the ' fomes ' of
• Gesta Innocentii iii. c. 2.
1 Fabricius quotes from Lud. Jac. a S. Carolo, Bibl. Pontif.
p. 112, a statement that Honorius III. wrote two collections
of sermons. The one was dedicated to S. Dominic. " Others,"
he says, " I read in MS. in a Cistercian Library, 'to the Clergy
and people of Rome,' dedicated to the Convent and Abbot of
Cisteaux. They are together with a life of S. Eichard of Cis-
tcaux." De Alva said that he could not find any collection of
his sermons in the best known libraries, as neither are they in
our public libraries.
2 Sermon on the Purification, Sanctificavit tabernaculum
suum. Ps. xlv. 5. Vulg. De Baudelis quotes also what is,
probably, a mere summary of what he said in " a sermon on
the Assumption," and adds, "He says the same in 'a sermon
on John the Baptist,' and ' on Passion Sunday.' " p. 50. He
must then have had some collection of his sermons before him.
198 Tradition, as embodied in works of Cent. XIII.
sin, so that thenceforth she could not sin. And therefore it is
subjoined, ' God is in the inidst of her, she shall not be moved.'
For in the B. V. alone, after the Conception of her Son, God
had a hostelry of rest, because thenceforth He found in her
neither sin nor fuel of sin. But in other Saints He found a
hostelry of commotion; because in them He found at least
fuel for sin, from which in this life they were never wholly
freed."
84. Turrecremata quotes from f"an ancient
opusculum" made from the authorities of the
saints, and revised by A. Castellanus, a Dominican,
a characteristic passage.
" 8 This Yirgin was conceived with fault and penalty, and
therefore her Conception is not to be celebrated ; yet she was
sanctified in the womb and cleansed from original sin. Whence
also her Nativity is celebrated at this time by the Holy Church.
And therefore we say that when the grace of the Holy Ghost
came upon her, she was so cleansed from all sin, that the
' fomes ' of sin is believed to have been altogether extinguished
in her. But the penalty of fault was not removed. "Well, then,
it is said 'lightened,' not 'exonerated.' For then is a thing
' exonerated,' when the burden is removed altogether ; but it
is 'lightened' when one part is withdrawn and the other left,"
Ac.
The thirteenth century has two classes of writers
who embody tradition, such as it had come to them,
tlie earlier Canonists, commenting on the Decretals,
or making " summa's " of their own, and the earlier
Schoolmen. They, each in their own way, trans-
mitted the teaching which they embodied, as being
the subject of their study, in Canon law, or in the
8 Serm. on the B. V. on Isa. is.. 1.
Canonists. Hugutio. 199
discipline of penitence, or in Christian doctrine.
Evidence as to the state of belief is given, in an un-
expected way, by some who preached on festivals
of the Blessed Virgin, in that they thought it was
praise of God's great doings to her, that she was
early freed from original sin, whereas, in later times,
the idea that she contracted original sin in the
moment of the infusion of her soul, as the result
of her conception after the ordinary way of nature,
even on the belief that she was freed from it imme-
diately afterwards in her mother's womb, was re-
jected as a wrong to her, as something abhorrent,
and as a sort of blasphemy.
85. Hugutio or Hugo Bishop of Ferrara (died
A.D. 12 12), wrote glosses upon the first short glosses
on the Decretals. His gloss (with his initial, H.)
was adopted by Joannes Semeca Teutonicus (i. e.
the German), of Halberstadt, his disciple, who was
in the favour of Gregory IX. and died A.D. 1243,
and by Bartholomew of Brescia, who died at 84,
A.D. 1250. The two chief glosses bearing on this
subject, were retained in the " amended " edition
of Gratian, published at the command of Gregory
XII., in his preface to which Gregory states that
he had given in charge to some of the Cardinals,
with other learned and pious men, to revise " the
decretum of Gratian with the ancient glosses, whose
authors, being pious men and Catholics, were to be
pardoned, if in some things, either through some
200 Care with which Decretals were revised.
error in them, or because many things had not been
defined by the sacred Councils, they spoke too freely,
as also in regard to things contrary to Catholic
truth, which had been interspersed by impious
writers both in the margins and in the body of the
Deere turn." This, he says, had been done, and the
whole Decretum had been revised, together with the
glosses. And he provides that " this Canon law, so
expurgated, should come unimpaired to all the
Christian faithful every where, and that no one
should be allowed to add or change or invert any
thing in the aforesaid work, or to join on any in-
terpretations, but that it should be for ever pre-
served entire and uncorrupt, as it is now printed in
this our city of Rome." In a later part of the man-
date 4, Gregory forbids " all every where, to add,
subtract, change, or invert any thing in the books
of the Canon law, so revised, corrected and expur-
gated by our mandate " as before 5. Without, of
course, inferring that the Pope was responsible for
all contained in so large a book, yet certainly, the
glosses so retained, in a work carefully revised and
expurgated from what seemed to be unsound, had
no longer the mere private weight of a Bishop
of Ferrara, however learned and thoughtful.
4 This mandate is still reprinted in the Corpus Juris Ca-
nonici, e. g. Bichter, Lips. 1839.
6 Gregorius Papa XIII. ad futuram rei memoriam, dated
"apud S. Petrum sub annulo Piscatoris 1580." I have used
the reprint, Paris 1585, " cum licentia " " ad exemplar Roma-
norum diligenter recognitum."
Hugo. Conception of B. V. not to be celebrated. 201
In this edition so revised, there are two chief
glosses of Bishop Hugutio. The first is on the
decree, which prescribes what festivals were to be
kept by the laity. The often-repeated gloss of
Hugo occurs here.
"*6 Of the festival of the Conception nothing is said, because
it is not to be celebrated (as it is in many regions, and especially
in England). And this is the ground, because she was con-
ceived in original sin, like the other saints, except the One
Person of Christ. In like way it says nothing of the Annun-
ciation of holy Mary, whereas yet it is so celebrated a festival."
The second gloss of Hugutio in this edition, is
upon the passage of S. Fulgentius 7, on the trans-
mission of original sin. There, on the explanation
of S. Paul's words " we were by nature children of
wrath," " by nature, i. e. from the nativity in the
womb," Hugutio added, —
" 8 That you may better understand this, know that there are
two nativities, one 'in the womb,' another 'from the womb.'
To be * born in the womb,' is that the soul should be infused
into the body in the womb. To ' be born from the womb,' is
to go forth from the womb to the light. Whence the B.V. and
John Baptist and Jeremiah were born with original sin in the
womb. And this the text means to say in the beginning, that
1 every man,' &c., [viz. ' that every man, who is conceived
through concumbency of man and woman is born witli original
sin']. Whence the Conception of the blessed Mary ought not
to be celebrated; but her nativity from the womb is well cele-
0 De Cons. dist. iii. c. 1. Pronuntiandum.
7 See above, p. 65.
8 On De Cons. dist. iv. c. 3. Firmissime col. 2436. Paris
1585.
202 Joh. Teutonicus ; approval of the Decretals.
brated, and that of John Baptist, because they were sanctified
in the womb, and original sin was forgiven them."
86. The remaining gloss is of Johann. Teutonicus,
from whose edition it is retained. It is on the
statement quoted from S. Augustine, " 9 For neither
is it granted to adults in Baptism, except perhaps
by the ineffable miracle of the Most Almighty
Creator, that the law of sin which is in the mem-
bers, warring against the law of the mind, should
be utterly extinguished and not be." The gloss
says, —
" * As in blessed Mary and in John the Apostle, because
neither of them could sin. Also the nativity of Mary in the
womb is not celebrated ; but the nativity from the womb well."
Besides the fact, that Joh. Teut. adopted the
former glosses, the contrast of his saying that there
was good reason for celebrating the Nativity of the
B. V '.from the womb, with the statement that her
nativity in the womb was not celebrated, implies a
conviction, that there was a reason for not cele-
brating it. Perrone mentions, from Strozzi, that
there were two other glosses, on the same side;
but I have not been able to find them 2. He adds,
9 De pecc. mer. i. ult. in de Cons. dist. iv. c. 2, Per Bap-
tismum.
1 It occurs in Gratian, " with the apparatus of John Theu-
tonicus and the additions of Bartholomew of Brma." Strasb.
1472.
2 Perrone says (P. 1. c. 2. note), "Five chapters in the de-
cree of Gratian are counted against the Immaculate Concep-
tion," viz. the three given above ; " the fourth is, Placuit, the
S. Raimund de Penyafort. His saying removed. 203
"it is known that the decree of Gratian is not
authentic, nor of itself constitutes an authority,
nor was even approved by Roman Pontiffs." The
mandate of Pope Gregory XIII. is very like an
approval.
There is a good deal of repetition among the
Canonists, for the occasion of speaking was mostly
the same. Yet some were great names. The next,
in time, was a Saint, eminent for his holiness.
87. S. Raimund de Penyafort, Penitentiary of Gre-
gory IX., collector of his Decretals, elected third
master of the Dominicans A.D. 1238, Doctor of
Canon law at Bologna, " 3 a man of great holiness,
and most perfect in canon and civil law."
He adds only a few words to those of Bp. Hugu-
tio; but grave enough to occasion them to be re-
moved from his works 4.
fifth is Quisyuis, which I have only indicated for brevity.
Comp. Strozzi (Controversia della Concezione della B. V. M.
P. 1. lib.) 3. c. 18. (Palermo 1700)." I have not access to Stroz-
zi's work. Two chapters in the de Oonsecr. begin, Quisquis,
"quisquis ex concupiscentia," dist. iv. c. 137, and "quisquis
dixerit," ib. c. 155. There are also three Canons of the Council
of Carthage under Aurelius against the Pelagians, which begin
with Placuit (cod. Eccl. Afr. 108 — 110), de Cons. Dist. iv. c.
152, 153, 154; but I have found nothing definite in any gloss,
such as Perroue's reference would lead one to expect.
3 Thol. de Lucha H. E. nov. xxi. 29, in Quetif i. 108.
4 " Alva, Sol Verit. Ead. 161, col. 1344, inquires, ' who took
away from all those editions the clause as to the Conception
of the B. V. which is read in MSS. ?' The answer is easy. It
was taken away by those who presided over the printing, on
204 Card. Hostiensis,
" 5 And note tbat there is no mention of the Annunciation of
Holy Mary, whereas yet it is so celebrated a festival ; nor of
her conception, because this ought not to be celebrated, because
she was conceived in sins, as also the other saints except the
One Person of Christ, Which was [conceived] not from seed of
man, but by the mystical breathing."
88. Henry de Segusio, Bp. of SisteronA.D. 1250,
Cardinal of Ostia A. D. 1262, is known to most of us
as "Hostiensis." He was called, Cave says, "Fons
et Splendor Juris." He speaks incidentally only ;
but his statement is remarkable, in that he men-
tions the sanctification of the B.V. in the womb as
the same in kind as that of Jeremiah and John
Baptist, and yet, by the titles with which he names
her, implies (as of course she is) that she is so far
above them.
account of the decree of the Council of Basle, tvhich also they
allowed themselves in many old writers. The Supreme Pontiffs
did not command this as to the ancients who wrote before the
Bull of Sixtus IV., but only as to the later. But those editors
acted so negligently that, removing the clause from the text, they
left a gloss in the margin, whose reclamation manifestly shows
that something has been cut out of the text of Haymund.
There are almost countless MSS. of this Summa in libraries."
Quetif, Scriptt. Ord. PraBdic. i. 109, quoted in the Preface to
S.Kaimund's Summa, p. lii. Veron. 1744. The Latin in Bodl.
64, is, "nee de conceptione ejusdem, quodillud nou debet cele-
brari, eo quodconcepta fuerit in peccatis, sicut et cseteri sancti,
excepta una Persona Christi, quse uon ex virili semine, sed
mistico spiramine [concepta] est." De Alva states that the
passage was in old originals and MSS. (he specifies two),
but says, that it was removed Iroin the edition of Borne, 1003.
Sol Ver. n. 264, p. 706.
5 Summa P. 1. tit. de ferns, Cod. Bod!. 64. f. 20.
all born naturally in original sin. 205
" G Who ought to confess ? Every sinner, whoever he be,
who has committed actual sin ; and this I say, because without
original sin was not conceived [genitus] of the seed of man and
woman, although some are read to have been sanctified in their
mother's womb, as Jeremiah, John Baptist, our blessed and
glorious Lady."
89. DurandusGul. (A.D. 1274), called " Specula-
tor " from his celebrated "Speculum juris," and
" Pater practice " from his skill in civil and canon
law, was a disciple of Card, Hostiensis. He was
in the favour of, and in office under, Clement IV.,
Gregory X., Nicolas III., Martin IV. (a 5th
Pope, Boniface VIII., pressed him to accept an
Archbishopric), was employed by Gregory to
carry some constitutions at the General Council of
Lyons. In his later years, he was Bishop of
Mende, subsequently to his completion of his
Rationale Divinorum Officiorum, with which most
of us are more familiar, finished A.D. 12867. In
both works he speaks against the celebration of
the Festival, on the ground of the Conception in
original sin. In the Speculum, enumerating the
festivals on which a process could not be continued,
he says, —
" 8 All the Festivals of the B. V. I do not speak of the
Feast of her Conception, because she was conceived in sins,
6 Summa L. v. tit. de poen. et rem, § quis debet confiteri
bit. f. 134-. v. Ven. 1538.
7 As he says, viii. 9. See Quetif, i. 480—3. Fabr. v.
Durandus.
8 Speculum P, 2. tit. do feriia fol. 75. Patavii 1479.
206 Durandus Spec. Mary conceived in sin.
although in places it is celebrated out of devotion ; nor do I
impeach such devotion."
In his Rationale of the Divine Offices he
speaks more at length. After dwelling on the
four festivals, he says, —
"9 Some also celebrate a fifth feast, of the Conception of the
B. V., saying, that, as the death of Saints is celebrated, not on
account of their death, but because they were then received in
the everlasting nuptials, in like way the feast of the Conception
may be celebrated, not because she was conceived, because she
was conceived in sin, but because the Mother of the Lord was
conceived ; asserting that this [hoc] was revealed to a certain
Abbot, in the midst of a shipwreck ; which [account] however
is not authentic l. Whence it is not to be approved ; since she
was conceived in sin ; i. e. through the concumbency of male
and female. But although she was conceived in sin, that
original sin was remitted to her, when she was sanctified in the
womb, like as both Jeremiah and the blessed John Baptist :
9 Eationale Div. Offic. T. vii. c. cvii. p. 824. Lugd.
1592, collated with the edition of Maintz 1459.
1 The unhistorical blunders in the Epistle " de Conceptione
B. Virginis," in which this story is related as if by S. Anselm,
have been pointed out by Gerberon, in his Censura upon it,
prefixed to S. Anselm's works. It is not only unhistoric, but,
professing to be written by S. Auselm, is a forgery. Gerberon
shows that two of the miracles, upon which the celebration of
the Festival is rested, are mixed with facts contradicted by
history ; that the doctrine contradicts S. Anselm's, and that
the account given of the celebration and subsequent suspension
of the Feast of the Conception is untrue. The fiction as to
the Abbot Elsinus recurs in the " Miraculum de Conceptione
S. Maria?," which, I should think, is the original form of the
fiction. The Epistle is appended to S. Anselm's works, pp. 505
—507, the " Miraculum, &c." p. 507.
Archidiac. Bonon. ; Barth. a S. Concord. 207
and therefore with good reason are her Nativity and John
Baptist's celebrated ; the nativity, I mean, from the womb,
when namely they came forth into the light, or into the world.
But their nativity in the womb, i. e. when their souls were
infused in their bodies, is not celebrated, as has been premised."
90. Guido de Baiisio, commonly quoted as Archi-
diaconus Bononiensis, or as "Archidiac." in the
Decretum, lectured about A.D. 1280 at Bologna.
The adoption of glosses of his in the Decretals
attests the estimation in which he was held. In
his Rosarium2, he adopted the words of Hugutio,
referring to his authority.
91. Bartholomseus a S. Concordio, of Pisa, a cele-
brated Dominican preacher as well as Jurist, must
have belonged to this century (since he died A.D.
1347, having passed nearly 70 years in religion3,
i.e. since about 1277). His " Summa Con-
fessorum" was a very popular book 4, as appears, both
from the familiar titles which it bore, " Bartholina,"
" Pisana, or Pisanella," " Magistruccia," the number
of its MSS., the frequency of its editions from the
time of the discovery of printing, and its translation
into Spanish 5.
"6 Of the feast of the Conception of the B. V., it must be
2 Rosarium p. 401. v. Yen. 1601.
3 Spon Eech. curieuses d'autiquite, diss. 16, p. 214.
4 " F. Aug. de Clavasio (died A.D. 1495) acknowledged that
he took all the cases of conscience in his ' Summa Angelica '
from this book." Quetif.
6 Quetif, i. 623, 624.
6 In his Summa, v. Feria?, lit. B. De Alva notes the omission
208 Joh. Andrea, Cone, of B. F. not to be venerated.
said, according to Thomas (3 p. q.'7),that, although the Eoman
Church does not celebrate it, it tolerates the custom of some
Churches who celebrate that Festival, whence that celebration
is not to be wholly reprobated, yet neither from this, that the
Feast of the Conception is celebrated, is it given to be understood
that she was holy in her conception, but, because it is not
known at what time she was sanctified, the Feast of her
sanctification rather than of her conception is celebrated on the
day of the Conception itself."
92. John Andrese, the most celebrated jurist,
perhaps, of the next century, who taught at
Bologna from A.D. 1303 to 1348, follows Durand,
both in respecting what was done out of devotion
and in dissuading from the observance of the
Festival.
"7 There are four Feasts of the Virgin Mary; the Annun-
ciation in spring; Assumption in summer; Nativity in Au-
tumn ; Purification in winter. But the feast of her passive Con-
ception is not included here, although it is celebrated in many
places, out of a devotion which is not to be impeached, as it is
said in the Spec. [ Durand' s] eod. tit. But do you say, that that
Conception, which was of human seed, is not to be venerated.
And this is to be held, that she was conceived in original sin,
as in de Consecr. Dist. 3, c. 1. But immediately after her
Conception she was sanctified, and thence the Church celebrates
the feast of her Nativity."
of the whole passage in one old MS. (n. 37), a freedom, which
scribes seem to have taken, or to have been directed to take.
Quetif notices that the library, from whose MS. the passage is
missing, is the same in which De Alva owns that a MS. of
JEgidius of Zamora was altered on the Conception, i. 624.
7 In 2 p. Novelise, Tit. de ferns super C. Conquestus, T. ii.
f. 56. Ven. 1581.
Eminent writers of the Xlllth century. 209
Other Jurists are referred to by Turrecremata,
but, although his references are evidently authentic,
the books themselves, probably, for the most part,
lie buried in the libraries where he saw them8.
Of the doctrinal writers of the 13th century,
besides the well-known schoolmen, who have im-
pressed their minds on European intellect till now,
Turrecremata mentions others, great in their day,
who did, in their generation, the work given them
to do; some of them even influenced subsequent
generations, and now are forgotten on earth, as if
they had never been. Thus, —
1)3. f One who was once well-known as " an emi-
nent Chancellor of Paris," " William, Chancellor of
Paris," is not known, who he is, or when he lived ;
only Turrecremata knew him to have been " an
ancient Doctor." In explaining the definition, that
"Virginity in corruptible flesh is a perpetual
meditation on incorruption," he said, —
" 9 Or, ' corruptibility ' may be taken thus, that no regard
8 He mentions another " Compilator juris," beginning
"omnis qui juste judicat," on c. Firmissime; John de Eriburg
(if he be different from John Teutonicus) ; " Compilator speculi
juris, called 'summa aumniarum,' " tit. de feriis q. 8, (different
from Durand's) ; Joannes Calderinus A.D. 1360 ; Peter of
Milan ; Petrus de Bracho. De Baudelis adds " Laurentius, an
ancient Glosser;" Bernardus Papiensis, A.D. 1213; another
commentator of the Decretum, beg. "ad decorem sponsae,"
on c. pronuntiandum ; Gralvaneus, probably Guelvan de la Flama,
about 1310.
• In his " Sumraa, in the matter on Virginity." Turr. P. 6. c.
O
210 Eminent writers, early In
be had to the condition of warfare, and l corruptible flesh '
be taken for the corruption of fault or punishment in general ;
and that which is of punishment or fault was in Adam and in
us, but in Adam innate, because according to that it was
possible for him to be corrupted ; in us otherwise, because
contracted. In Christ there was only that of penalty from the
beginning, and this taken by Him : in the B. V. before grace,
both sorts of corruptibility were contracted; after grace, only
the corruptibility of penalty ; and according to this the defini*
tion suits alike to Adam and to us and to Christ and to the
B. V.1"
94. f Alanus (perhaps Magnus, de Lisle, who died
A.D. 1202, Quetif, i. 194, from Alberic, p. 429.
Leibn.) : —
" 2 Some dogmatized that Christ took flesh in the Virgin, not
of the Virgin j some, in the Virgin and of the Virgin ; some,
neither in the Virgin nor of the Virgin. But they who say
that Christ took flesh in the Virgin, not of the Virgin, pay Him
a senseless honour, saying that 'new uncorrupted flesh was
28. f. 112. De Alva found the work in the Royal Library of
S. John of Toledo, under the title " Summa universalis Theo-
logiae, edita a prsecipuo Cancellario Parisiensi." It began
" Vadam in agruin et colligam," n. 113. p. 451.
1 De Alva objects to Turr.'s omitting the clause at the end,
"although ifc[the definition] be notextended toinfants onaccount
of that expression, the ' perpetual meditation.'" Yet this relates
not to the subject of " corruptibility," but to his definition of
"virginity in corruptible flesh," being "a perpetual meditation
of incorruption ;" of which, of course, infants are incapable.
2 Turrecremata quotes " Expos. Symb. Athan. ; Serm. Purif.
and de Assumpt. B. V." vi. 26. f. 117 ; De B. the Expos. Symb.
Ath. only. Trithemius does not mention the Expos. Symb.
Athan., but says, " he wrote in metre and prose almost count-
less treatises (opuscula) whereby his memory has been made
immortal with posterity, but a few only hare come to my know-
ledge,"
the Xlllth century. 211
created in heaven,' or that ' the whole flesh of Adam was not
corrupted through sin,' but that a certain particle was re-
served clean and uncorrupt and was derived by propagation to
the Virgin, which Christ took, fearing lest the flesh of Christ
should be weak through fault and unclean through vice, if He
had taken flesh which was a part of Mary, which in her concep-
tion was, like that of the rest, corrupt through fault and
guilt ; and they do not observe, that, in the remaining genera-
tions, flesh is severed from flesh, by the agency of concupis-
cence, whence it is held by the same fault and severed in the
same guilt as before its severance. But in Mary, since flesh was
severed from flesh by the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit, in
that very severance the flesh was cleansed by the Holy Spirit,
so that what was corrupt of Mary was clean and uncorrupt in
Christ. Whence also the Catholics, well knowing this, say that
Christ took flesh, both in the Virgin and of the Virgin."
95. Petrus Prsepositus or Prsepositivus, Chan-
cellor of Paris, A.D. 1207, "3a wonderful man,
author of some excellent sermons and postillse on
the sentences:" —
"*Eirst, it is inquired, whether the B. V. was sanctified
before the Conception of her flesh was ended. It is to be
said, ' not,' because sanctification is cleansing from evil, which
cannot be without grace, and because the rational soul is the
proper subject of grace. So before the infusion of the rational
soul she could not be sanctified. Secondly, it is inquired
whether she was sanctified before animation. It is to be said
as above, according to the aforesaid in the preceding question,
— ' not.' But if any one says, that she ought to have been
sanctified in her parents, it is not true, because no perfec-
tion, belonging to the father, passes to the offspring. But if
any one say again, that in the very instant in which the soul
3 Alberic. in Bulseus Hist. Univ. Paris, iii. 706.
4 On 3. Sent. d. 3, given by De Alva, n, 260. p. 702.
o 2
212 Eminent writers, early in
is infused, she was sanctified, it is not true, because then she
would not have contracted original sin, and would not have
needed the redemption made by Christ, which is false. For
this belongs to Christ Alone ; but we all are born * children of
wrath.' "
96. Moneta of Cremona, A.D. 1220—1250, one
of the first Dominicans, " eminent for holiness and
sacred learning. — Roman nobles and other learned
men came to hear him teaching at Bologna. — He
lost his sight through study and the tears of devo-
tion." Quetif calls his "summa" "opus non satis
commendandum 5."
" 6 Other men [besides our Lord] are therefore called sous of
God by the grace of adoption, because, being not sons of God,
yea rather children of wrath, as the Apostle says, they were by
the grace of God made His sons, not having been sons of God.
But Christ, as Man, was alway free from all sin, whence
He never was other than the Son of God. Nor was He then
made Son of God from not having been Son of God, and there-
fore He cannot be called a Son of adoption, but rather by grace
of union."
97. Gulielmus Arvernus or Alvernus, Bishop
of Paris from A.D. 1228 to 1249, is spoken
of hy Trithemius as "a man learned in Divine
Scriptures, not ignorant of secular philosophy, and in
knowledge venerable ; he composed not a few works
of his erudition ; in which, showing himself a learned
6 Leand. Albert., f. 184, a. in Quetif, i. 123.
6 Summa contra Katharos et Waldenses, L. 3. c. 3. De B.'s
quotation, corrected by Quetif (i. 123) from the original. De
Alva pronounced the quotation <{ fictitious, made by Bandelis,
as being his image." Ver. 219. p. G30.
the Xlllth century. 213
and devout master, he made his memory immortal.'*
Alas for human predictions ! Half of his works
are missing. He speaks of our Lord and our first
parents as having been alone exempt from original
sin: —
"7You ought to remember that that grace [decor] is not
found in human souls, save when their powers have been
purged and freed from original perversity and other deformities
of vices ; but, before, they are neither graceful nor beautiful,
except the souls of our first parents in their state of innocence
(as we said before), wherein they needed neither cleansing nor
freeing, having still their natural grace ; excepting also the Soul
of the Saviour, of which you ought to be most certain, that it
never had any thing whatever of original stain; but in the souls
of our first parents in the aforesaid condition, grace and beauty
were necessarily the same."
98. William of Auxerre, a Paris Theologian,
" nominatissimus et in qusestionibus profundissi-
mus 8," who died at Rome A.D, 1230, wrote a
u Summa," which was " twice abridged, extracted
by Dionysius the Carthusian, and employed by
Durand," He says, —
" 9 It is proved, that Christ was, in two ways, in the loins of
Abraham, because the Blessed Virgin, who was His flesh, was,
in two ways, in the loins of Abraham ; for she was conceived by
the act of concupiscence, not by the Holy Ghost, and therefore
7 De virt. c. 8. Opp. p. Ill, Ven. 1591.
8 Eabr. Bibl. Lat. v. Gulielmus Antissiod. quoting Alberic,
p. 538.
• Summa, L. iii.Tr. i. c. 3. f. 115, 115 v., Paris, 1500, written
between 1220—1230, abridged by Ardego, Bishop of Florence,
and by Herbert, or Aubert, Dean of Auxerre, A.D. 1247. Fabr.
214 Alexander de Hales ;
she contracted original sin ; and therefore Maurice J, Bishop of
Paris, forbade the Feast of her Conception to be celebrated in
the Church of Paris."
99. "fJohn of Paris2" [i.e. John Poinlane,
Pimgensasinum] Dominican, lectured on the Sen-
tences, at least A.D. 1244, died before 1269 2: —
" 8 Teaching that the Y. M. was conceived in original sin, he
says that the opposite opinion was against the authorities of
the saints, and derogates from the dignity of the Son of God
and His Mother, because, according to it, she would not have
belonged to the general redemption of her Son, nor would she
be the Mother of an Universal "Redeemer."
To turn to the great writers, who have so im-
pressed posterity ; —
100. Alexander de Hales, A.D. 1230, so follows
S. Bernard, that to quote him would be to repeat
extracts from S. Bernard. But he lays down, at
the beginning and distinctly, that " the B.V. must
in her generation contract sin from her parents. "
He is meeting the question, which used to be
placed first, whether the B. V. could be sanctified
before her Conception.
1 Maurice de Soliaco, who was present at the [5th] Council
of Tours, A.D. 1163, died A. 1196. Pagi A. 1164. n. 18. A. 1196.
n. 11.
2 Quetif, i. 119.
8 In 3. Sent. d. 3. Turr. P. 6. c. 29. f. 119. v. De Alva, who
had [Ver. 183] ridiculed the citation of " John of Paris, Domi-
nican," as being too vague, owned in a subsequent edition
(Ead. 218. col. 1547) the existence of his work on the Sen-
tences in Belgian libraries, on the authority of G. Carnif. and
J. Bunder. Catal. MSS. f. 340.
contradictory attempt of explanation. 215
" * Sanctification is twofold ; of the nature, and of the person.
Sanctification of the person is by present grace : sanctification
of the nature will only be through future glory, for there, i.e.
in glory, nature will be sanctified, as is hinted 1 Cor. xv. Tor
in the resurrection nature itself shall be sanctified, because
then shall come to pass the saying which is written, ' "Where,
O death, is thy victory ? Where, O death, is thy sting ?' He
calls the ' fomes ' the ' sting.' But sanctification, which is by
Baptism and by present grace, is not a sanctification of nature,
but only of the person ; but the ' fomes ' still remains after
Baptism in the nature, and is transferred by generation into
the whole nature : wherefore generation is not without sin,
because nature is not sanctified, and by generation nature is
transfused ; therefore it is necessary, that what is generated
should in the generation contract sin. And therefore the B. V.
could not be sanctified in her parents ; rather, it was neces-
sary that in her generation she should contract sin from her
parents5."
He sums up, —
4 P. 3. q. ix. membr. 2. art. 1.
6 De Alva quotes Alanus of Paris, who, he says, wrote
before 1390, Michael of Milan (whom Wading supposes to be
the same as another of his authorities), A.D. 1480, and others
following them, who say that he retracted this (n. 12. p. 261),
alleging his Mariale. Turrecremata says, " But what is said of
this irrefragable Doctor, that he retracted this conclusion when
near death, until sufficient testimony of this be given to this
sacred Council (Basle), is accounted to be of no moment ; but
what some others said, that he retracted it in his Mariale, is
manifestly a fiction ; yea, in many places of the same book, as
when he speaks of the sauctification of the Virgin, he continues
and confirms the same doctrine." in Alva, Ib. Alva quotes a
citation by Gosch. Hollen on the other side. The two answers
of De Alva are contradictory ; 1) that the passages alleged do
not prove that he denied the Immaculate Conception ; 2) that
he retracted his denial. His earliest authority is about a cen-
tury and a half after the death of De Hales, A.D. 1245.
216 De Haleti ivork examined and approved.
" ° It is to be granted, that the glorious Virgin, before her
Nativity, after the infusion of the soul in her body, was sancti-
fied in her mother's womb."
Wading 7 states that he wrote his " Summa " of
Scholastic Theology at the command of Innocent
IV., that his work was examined and approved by
seventy most skilled theologians, commended by
Innocent, and set forth by Alexander IV. to be a
lecture book in all universities.
101. Albertus Magnus (taught at Cologne, 1238,
Aquinas being his disciple among others, was made
Bp. of Ratisbon A.D. 1260, by Alexander IV.)
puts the question, " Whether the flesh of the B. V.
was sanctified before animation or after?" He
treats it as a presumption to say that the flesh was
forepurified, so as not to infect the soul at the
moment of its infusion, and thought it probable
that the B. V. was sanctified soon after anima-
tion : —
" 8 It is inquired, whether her flesh was sanctified before
animation or after? For some have presumed to say this,
that she contracted original sin ' in the cause ' and in the
matter of her body, but, because the Holy Ghost and the soul
came together to the body, and the Holy Ghost is more active
than any thing active, therefore He forecame the soul in the
entering the body, and cleansed it, so that it might not be able
to infect the soul with original guilt.'*
6 P. 3. q. ix. memb. 2. art. 4. resol.
7 Scriptt. Ord. Min. p. 6.
8 In 3 Sent. dist. 3. art. 4. T. xv. 2. p. 26.
Albertus Magnus. 217
His next question is, " Whether she was sanc-
tified after the animation, and before the nativity
from the womb ?" He answers, —
"9 It is to be said, that she was sanctified before the nativity
from the womb. But on what day or what hour, no man can
know, except through revelation ; save that it is more probable,
that it was conferred soon after animation than that it was long
awaited."
On S. Luke he says, —
" ! ' Shall overshadow thee.' A shadow hath five things in
it; refrigeration, temperament of vision, &c. And to these five
are reduced the expositions of the Fathers who have expounded
the passage before us. For as to this, that shade implies a
certain refrigeration, there are two glosses ; one which says,
that to c overshadow ' is to refrigerate from ' the incentive to
vices.' But ' the incentive to vices ' is the ' fomes,' and thus, by
the virtue of the Most Highest, the B. V. was purged from the
'fomes.' But you may say, this seems to be false, because she
was sanctified in the womb from original sin. To which it is
to be said, that she was sanctified in the womb from sin, and
from all defilement of original sin, but the ' fomes ' itself was
not extinguished in her, but bound, so that it could not be
moved to an act either of venial or mortal sin. And after-
wards, by the exercise of good works, it was, together with the
binding, weakened, so that it was not felt, but in the Concep-
tion itself of the Word, it was altogether extinguished, so that
it should be altogether none. And this is what the gloss says."
102. S. Bonaventura (A.D. 1255) weighs care-
fully2 the grounds alleged in behalf of the opinion
8 In 3 Sent. dist. 3. art. 5. p. 27.
1 Postilla3 sup. Luc. c. 1. f. 25. Hagenau. 1504.
2 In Sent. L. iii. dist. iii. q. 2. Opp. T. v. p. 32.
218 S. Bonaventurrfs summary
of those, who " will to say that in the soul of the
B.V. the grace of sanctification forecame the stain
of original sin," and those who " laid down, that
the sanctification of the Virgin was subsequent to
the contraction of original sin, and this, because no
one was free from the fault of original sin, save
the Son of the Virgin Alone." He sums up, that
" the grounds proving this last, ' that the sanctifica-
tion of the Virgin was subsequent to the contraction
of original sin/ are to be conceded." The grounds
which he states, are 3, —
" ' 4 All sinned in Adam.' But this is only because, accord-
ing to the ratio seminalis, we were in Adam ; therefore, if the
Virgin was so, it seemeth that she contracted original sin, like
others also.
" Also Augustine 6 ; ' no one is freed from the mass of sin,
except in faith of the Redeemer ;' therefore all, whosoever are
delivered, are delivered through Christ: but one is not delivered
from sin, who hath it not. Therefore it seemeth that all other
than Christ contracted original sin.
" Also Pope Leo, in a sermon on the Nativity of the Lord ;
' Our Lord, the Destroyer of sin and death, as He found none
free from guilt, so He came to free all ;' therefore neither did
He find the B. V. free ; therefore she contracted original
sin.
" This same seemeth to be so, on ground of reason ; because,
if the B. Y. was without original sin, she was without desert of
death : therefore either injustice was done her when she died,
or she died by a dispensation [dispensative] for the salvation
of the human race. The first is a reproach to God ; for, were
it true, Grod were not a just requiter. The second is a con-
3 In Sent. L. iii. dist. iii. q. 2. Opp. T. v. p. 31.
4 Bom. v. 6. 5 De corr. et grat. c. 7.
against the Imm. Cone. 219
tumely to Christ ; for, were it true, Christ were not a sufficient
Eedeemer. Therefore both are false and impossible. It re-
mains, then, that she had original sin.
" Also, no one belongs to the Redemption of Christ, save
one who has fault. If then the B. V. was without original sin,
it seemeth that she belongeth not to the redemption of Christ.
But great is the glory to Christ from the saints whom He re-
deemed. Therefore, if He did not redeem the B. V., He is
deprived of His noblest glory. If it is profane and impious to
say this, then, &c.
" Also, if the B. Y. had not original sin, and the door is shut
against none save by the desert of original sin, it seemeth to
follow that, had she died before Christ, she would have mounted
straight to heaven. Therefore it seemeth not, that the door
was opened to all through Christ. And so the Apostle would say
falsely, ' It pleased Him that all things should be reconciled
by Him, both which are in heaven and on earth.' "
And in his own answer to the arguments, —
" For as the Apostle says, ' All have sinned and need the glory
of God.' The Gloss says, ' All sinners find the grace of Christ,
"Who Alone came without sin ; and all need the glory of God,
i. e. that He should deliver, .Who can ; not thou, who needest
deliverance.' And this same thing Augustine says, on John,
treating of the words, ' Behold the Lamb of God,' where he
saith, ' That He Alone could take away the sins of the world,
"Who Alone came without sin, because He hath no sin.' This
mode ofspeaJcing is more common and more reasonable and safer'
More common, because almost all hold, that the B. V. had
original sin ; inasmuch as this appears from her manifold suffer-
ing of punishment [poenalitate], which she must not be said to
have suffered for the redemption of others; which also one
must not say that she had by taking them on herself [assump-
tione], but by contracting them [contraction e]. It is more
reasonable, because the being of nature precedes the being of
grace, either by time or by nature. And therefore Augustine
says, that 'to be born is prior to being re-born;' as being is
220 S. Bonaventura, Imm.Conc., of old, unheard of.
prior to well-being : the union of the soul to the flesh is prior
to the infusion of grace into it. If then that flesh was infected,
it was born to infect the soul by original sin through its own
infection : it is. therefore necessary to lay down, that the infec-
tion of original sin was prior to sauctification. It is safer,
because it is more concordant with piety and the authority of
the saints. It is more concordant ivith tlie authority of the
saints, in that the saints commonly, when they speak of this
subject, except Christ Alone from that universality, wherewith
it is said, ' All have sinned in Adam.' Eut there is no one
found, of those whom we have heard of with, our ears, who said
that the Virgin Mary was free from original sin. It is more
concordant also with the piety of faith, because, although the
mother is to be had in reverence, and great devotion ought to
be had towards her, yet much greater is to be had towards the
Son, from Whom all honour and glory comes to her. And
therefore, because this regards the excellent dignity of Christ,
that He is the Redeemer and Saviour of all, and that He opened
the door to all, and that He Alone died for all, the B. V. M. is
in no wise to be excluded from this universality, lest, while the
excellency of the Mother is amplified, the glory of the Son be
diminished, and thus in this the mother be provoked, who
willed that her Son be extolled and honoured more than her-
self, He the Creator, than her, the creature. Adhering then to
this position, for the honour of Jesus Christ, which in no wise
prejudices the honour of the mother, since the Son incomparably
excels the mother, let us hold, as the common opinion holdeth,
that the sanctification of the Virgin was after the contraction
of original sin6."
6 Perrone (p. 29) alleges from S. Bonaventura a " Serm. 2.
de B. V. M. Opp. in. 389, Bom. 1596," maintaining the Im-
maculate Conception. The editor, however, of S. Bonaventura's
works, ed. MoguntisB, 1609 (T. Ang. de Eocca, Augustinian,
Sacristan of the Apost. Palace), says, "S. Bonaventura (in lib.
3. Sent. dist. 3. art. i. q. 1 and 2) maintains altogether,
with S. Bernard, S. Thomas, and others, that the B. V. was
conceived in original sin. Hence it must be certainly confessed
Sermon wrongly attributed to him. 221
103. S.Thomas Aquinas, A.D. 1 255, in his Summa
TheologiaB, his commentary on the Sentences, his
Summa contra Gentiles, and five other works,
maintained that the Blessed Virgin was conceived
in original sin. I cite only his Summa, as being
one of his two last works.
that this sermon is not S. Bonaventura's, since he himself, in
many other places, altogether and steadily maintains the opinion,
which he affirmed in the 3rd book of the Sentences." T. iii. p.
355. And more fully in the notice prefixed to the volume,
" I wish to admonish the readers that the second sermon on
the B. Mary Ever- Virgin, is either not a genuine work of
this holy Doctor (as is said in our marginal note) or that, in
regard to the Conception of the B. M. without original sin,,
something has been added by some modern, as frequently
occurs in many looks. It is clear that this was done in the
1 Compendium TheologiaB ' printed formerly, and especially in
the chapter ' On Sanctification,' L. iv., as is ascertained from
many MSS., from which that Compendium, which was circu-
lated under the name of S. Bonaventura, seems for the most
part to differ, an addition being appended contrary to the
opinion of this Doctor in the same chapter of the Compendium,
and in the Book on the Sentences, 3 d. 3, art. 1, q. 1, 2." The
sermon was inserted subsequently to the first collection of his ser-
mons. It was not in the edition of E/eutlingen, 1484, nor of Hage-
nau, 1496. The passage, whosesoever it is, is : " Our Lady was full
of preventing grace in her sanctification, i. e. grace preservative
against the foulness of original fault, which she would have
contracted from the corruption of nature, unless she had been
prevented and preserved by special grace. For the Son of the
Yirgin Alone was free from original fault, and His Virgin
mother. For we must believe, that by a new kind of sanctifi-
cation, in the beginning of her Conception, the Holy Spirit
redeemed her, and by singular grace preserved her from original
sin, — original sin, not which was in her, but which would have
been in her."
222 S. Thomas Aquinas.
" r The sanctification of the Blessed Virgin cannot be under-
stood before her animation, on two grounds ; first, because the
sanctificatiou, of which I am speaking, is nothing but cleansing
from original sin. For holiness is perfect cleanness, as Diony-
sius says. But fault cannot be cleansed except by grace, of
which the rational creature alone is the subject. And there-
fore the Blessed Virgin was not sanctified before the infusion
of the rational soul. Secondly, because, since the rational
creature alone is susceptible of fault, the offspring conceived,
before the infusion of the rational soul, is not capable of fault.
And so, in whatever way the Blessed Virgin had been sanc-
tified before animation, she would never have incurred the stain
of original fault, and so would not have needed the redemption
and salvation which is by Christ, of "Whom it is said, * He shall
save His people from their sins.' But this is unfitting, that
Christ should not be ' the Saviour of all men ' as is said 1 Tim.
ii. It remains then that the sanctification of the Blessed
Virgin was after her animation."
" 8 If the soul of the Blessed Virgin had never been defiled
by the contagion of original sin, this would derogate from the
dignity of Christ, according to which He is the universal
Saviour of all. And therefore under Christ, "Who needed not
to be saved, as being the universal Saviour, the purity of the
Blessed Virgin was the greatest. For Christ in no way con-
tracted original sin, but was holy in His very Conception, ac-
cording to that of Luke i., ' That Holy Thing which shall be
born of thee shall be called the Son of God.' But the Blessed
Virgin contracted indeed original sin, yet was cleansed from it,
before she was born from the womb."
Then, in answer to the argument that " no fes-
tival is celebrated, except as to a holy thing, but
some celebrate the feast of the Conception of the
Blessed Virgin," he answers, —
7 3 p. q. 27. art. 2. c. 8 Ib. ad 2.
Sanctification of B. F. object of F. of her Cone. 223
" 9 Although the Roman Church does not celebrate the Con-
ception of the Blessed Virgin, yet it tolerates the custom of
some Churches who celebrate that festival ; whence such cele-
bration is not to be wholly reprobated. And yet thereby, that
the festival of the Conception is celebrated, it is not given to be
understood, that she was holy in her Conception ; but, because
it is not known at what time she was sanctified, the feast of
her sanctification rather than of her Conception is celebrated
on the day of her Conception."
And in answer to the objection from the text,
" If the root be holy, so are the branches ;" " but
the root of children is their parents ; therefore the
Blessed Virgin could be sanctified in her parents,
before animation," he says, —
" J Sanctification is twofold. The one is of the whole nature,
in that the whole human nature is liberated from all corrup-
tion of fault and punishment : and this shall be in the resur-
rection. The other is personal sanctification, which does not
pass to the offspring, begotten according to the flesh, because
this sanctification regards not the flesh, but the mind. And
therefore if the parents of the Blessed Virgin were cleansed
from original sin, nevertheless the Blessed Virgin contracted
original sin, since she was conceived, according to the concu-
piscence of the flesh, from the union of male and female. Eor
Augustine says, in his * de Nuptiis et Concupiscentia,' that all
which is born of concumbency [concubitus] is * flesh of sin.' "
S. Thomas says much the same in two of his
books on the Sentences, so that it seems even
strange, that a single passage from that work
should have been cited, in proof that he believed
the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin.
9 Ib. ad 3. 1 Ib. ad 4.
224 Passage alleged to the contrary harmonized
The passage occurs in an answer to an argument
derived from a passage of S. Anselm, already
quoted 2, that " it was meet that the Virgin, whom
God prepared as a Mother for His Only-Begotten
Son, should be adorned with purity, than which
none greater can be conceived under heaven;"
therefore, it was argued, "God could create no-
thing better than the Blessed Virgin." S. Thomas
answered, —
" 3 Purity is increased by removal from the contrary, and so
there may be found a created thing, than which nothing can be
purer among created things, if it be defiled by no contagion of
sin, and such was the purity of the Blessed Virgin, who was
free from sin, original and actual. Yet she was below God,
in that there was in her the power of sinning ; but goodness
is increased by approach to the limit, which is at an infinite
distance, viz. the Supreme Good; so that something better could
be made than any finite good."
According to the belief of S. Thomas himself,
the Blessed Virgin was cleansed from original sin
in her mother's womb; she was then, during her
whole life on earth (according to his belief, as he
states it in those other places), " free from sin,
original and actual." His statement, then, here
does not in the least contradict what he had said
elsewhere, that she was " conceived in original
sin." The answer is given more fully by the
author of the " Harmony of the sayings and con-
2 See above, p. 16(5, • i. d. 44, 3, 3«.
by Author of "Harmony of his sayings" 225
elusions of S. Thomas Aquinas," subjoined to his
works.
" 4 1 answer, that it is to be said, that there is no repugnance
or even apparent contradiction. First, because, in his 1st book
of the Sentences, he makes no mention of her Conception, but
only speaks of her, and her immunity after her sanctification,
as appears from the passage cited from S. Anselin which he is
there explaining, as also it could be said of any one, sanctified
either in the womb or by Baptism, that he was then free [im-
munis] from all sin, original and actual.
" Secondly, because, although he says that she was ' free,'
yet he does not say that she was always free, but says it, with-
out any indication of universality, as he says also of other
men, that one was at some time without even venial sin in this
life, but not always nor long, as is clear, 3a. q. 79. 4. 2m., 3. d. 3.
q. 3. q. 1 L. lm., 4. d. 12. q. 2. art. 2. q. 1. lm., d. 21. q. 2. 1.
4m., Ma. q. 7. 12. 4m.
" Thirdly, because if any one will pertinaciously assert, that
the Holy Doctor means to speak of the Conception of the
Blessed Virgin, he ought to know that it did not bear upon the
matter, of which he was there treating, to insert any thing as
to the passive Conception of the Mother of Christ, whereby
she was conceived, but rather of the passive Conception of
Christ, of which he says elsewhere too [that any one who
should say] that there was any thing in Adam, not infected by
original sin, from which Christ was formed, in the assumption
itself [of the flesh], is a heretic, but that the cleansing of His
flesh from the preceding infection, at least in idea, preceded its
assumption, as is said, 3. d. 3. q. 4. art. 1. 0., art. 2. c., 2m., L.
princ0., Jo. 3. lect. 5. But in the first book of the Sentences,
there corresponded to the passive Conception of Christ, only
something as to the active Conception, whereby the Blessed
Virgin conceived Christ, on account of the passage of S. An-
selm, introduced there as an authority, wherein it is said that
God prepared her for His Only-Begotten, as a Mother.
4 Opp. T. xviii. Concordantise dictorum et conclusionum D.
Thomse de Aquino, n. 370.
P
226 Sermons on " Salve Regina." The B. V.
"Fourthly, that S. Thomas says there, as S. Anselm also
asserts, that the purity of the Mother of Christ was beneath
God, in that in her there was the power of sinning. But this,
not through actual sin, as he himself says, Verit. q. 24. 9. 2ra,
unless perhaps the Blessed Virgin be considered in her material
substance, as he also adduces as to all angels and men, Cont.
3. c°. 109. Therefore, by original sin.
" Fifthly, because he is there explaining the passage alleged
from S. Anselm, who every where expressly held, as all the
saints commonly affirm, that the Blessed Mother of God was
certainly conceived with original sin."
104. This illustrates, and is illustrated by, the
saying of the writer of the Sermons 5 " on the Anti-
phone Salve Regina," who speaks of the Blessed
Virgin as having been " innocent of both original
and actual sins," because he held with S. Bernard
that she had been " absolved from original sin in
her mother's womb." He so explains the words of
S. Augustine, —
" 6 ' That power was given her to overcome sin on all sides,'
i. e. on the side of original as well as of actual sins. She then
alone excepted, what can all the rest say, but what the Apostle
John says, ' If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves,
and the truth is not in us ' ? I too opine with pious belief,
that in your Mother's womb you were absolved from original
sin, nor is the belief vain or the opinion false. Lastly, reasons
5 Cl. de Rota attributed them to Bernard, Archbishop of
Toledo ; but Mabillon observes that this was an error ; since
the author in the 3rd Sermon adopts some of S. Bernard's
Serm. 16 on the Canticles, but Bernard of Toledo was older
than S. Bernard, at the end of the eleventh cent.
c In Antiphon, Salve Eegina, Serm, 4. Opp. S. Bern. App.
ii. 748.
innocent qforig. sin, because absolved. 227
and authorities exist in support of this. Reason thus, If others
were sanctified in their mother's womb, much more thou, the
Mother of the Lord. But Jeremiah and John are read to
have been, the one ' sanctified,' the other filled with the Holy
Ghost, in their mothers' wombs. Thou then too, Mary, Mother
of God, who alone possessedst the whole grace of the Holy
Ghost which others had in part. For the Angel Gabriel called
thee ' full of grace ' — Thou earnest forth, as dawn, lightsome
and ruddy, because, original sin leing overcome in the mother's
womb, thou wert born, lightsome with the knowledge of truth,
and ruddy with the love of virtue. Hence it is, that the holy
Church honours with festive celebrations thy holy nativity,
which otherwise she would not do. Lastly, of none beside thee,
save of the Lord thy Son and John Baptist, who were born
holy, does she celebrate the Nativity."
Immediate results of the teaching of S. Bona-
ventura and S. Thomas were two books which have
ever continued to be reprinted in their works.
The one certainly was most popular, and has been
ascribed to Albertus M., ^Egidius de Colonna, S.
Bonaventura, or S. Thomas.
105. Hugo de Argentina, Argentoratensis, Domi-
nican, " 7 real author of the excellent Compendium
Theologies Veritatis," A.D. 1270—1290:-
"8 There were three sanctifications of the Mother of God.
The first was the sanctification in the womb 8, and this had three
effects, viz. the expiation of original fault, and the infusion of
7 Fabric, iii. 288. Quetif, i. 470, sq. It was attributed
to him by Laur. Pignon, about 1403.
8 Compend. Theol. Ver. L. iv. c. 4. in S. Bonay. T. 7. p.
740.
9 John de Combis, Franciscan, has a note on this passage.
" The Doctors do not hold this opinion, nor the Church,
p 2
228 Sixt. IV. held decree of Basle undecisive.
grace, and so great restriction of the fomes, that she could not be
led into any sin, although yet the fomes itself remained, accord-
ing to the essence. The second sanctification was in the over-
which abrogated it in the C. of Basle ; whence Scotus (3
d. 3) says, that 'the most Blessed Virgin was holy in the
beginning of her conception, in which sanctification she had
preservation from original sin and infusion of grace, and extir-
pation of the fomes, so that it did not remain in her, except
causally,' " ad loc. p. 314, Lugd. 1579. A Dominican edition
by Seraphyn. Capponi a Porrecta has also a note ; " The
third * removes original fault' — i.e., contracted in act, yet
abraded as speedily as possible. By the holy Eoman Church
they are excommunicated ipso facto who brand this opinion
with the note of mortal sin or heresy ; as they too who in like
way presume to condemn the contrary opinion (Sixt. IV. Extra v.
Grave nimis). Hence, stupidly enough, showing their own
ignorance, some adduce the Council of Basle as determining
against the opinion of the Author. Let such look to Leo X., in
the sacred acts of the 2nd Lateran Council, calling the C.
of Basle, not a Council, but a Conciliabulum, and be ashamed of
such support given them. Let the sessions, too, be examined,
and it will be clear, that at that time they were not with
Eugenius, whom the Catholic Church reverenced as undoubted
Pope ; and who, as being truly owned by her as undoubted
Pope, while that their conciliabule of Basle still lasted, gathered
together the sacred Council of Florence, of Eastern and
Western Fathers. Be this said, not to derogate from the
opposite opinion, but to show what is their knowledge, who in
this matter lean on the broken reed of that which deserved not
to be called a Council (as Leo saith there). How could
Sixtus himself, who was subsequent to that Council, and
favoured that opinion, not have accepted that determination of
Basle, if he had seen it to have any force ? How should he, at the
end of his Extrav., have said these formal words, ' Since this has
not yet been decided by the Roman Church and Apostolic see,'
if those of Basle, determining this, had represented the Catholic
Church, which is the Koman, &c.," p. 362, Ven. 1588.
Writers, taken for S. Bonav. or S. Thorn. Aq. 229
shadowing of the Holy Ghost and the Conception of the Son
of God, which superadded two to the three premised, viz. the
entire extinction of the fomes, and confirmation m good, so
that she, who before was only able not to sin, now could not
sin. These two effects the Angel expressed, ' The Holy Ghost
shall supervene in thee,' as to the first, and ' the power of the
Highest shall overshadow thee ' as to the second. This con-
firmation was, not the taking away of free will, but its comple-
tion by grace. The third sanctification was in the inhabitation
of the Son of God, Who abode nine months in her womb, and
added two more effects to all the aforesaid. One, that all the
dispositions of the fomes were taken away, as, when a disease
is cured, there yet sometimes remains some residue to be
cured. The second was a dedication to Divine things. — In the
first sanctification, which was in the womb, the B. Y. was
cleansed from the fomes, as far as the fomes regarded her own
person, because nothing remained in her person to be cleansed,"
&c.
106. Hannibaldus de Hannibaldis, 23rd of the
Magistri in Theologia of Paris, Cardinal A.D.
1261, " l a man of great humility and truth, and a
holy man, whom F. Thomas much loved; he wrote
on the Sentences a work dedicated to Card. Han-
nibaldus (his uncle, Cardinal 1237, or 1240) which
is nothing else than an abridgment of the sayings
of F. Thomas:"—
" 2 The Blessed Virgin was sanctified, neither before her Con-
ception nor in the conception before the infusion of the soul,
because the soul is the proper subject of sanctification ; nor in
the instant itself of the infusion of the soul, because thus she
would not have contracted original sin, as neither did Christ,
1 Tholom. de Lucha, H. E. xxii. 23. in Quetif, i. 261.
2 Scriptum secundum in Sent, ad Annibald. 3. dist.3. Art. 1.
f. 82, in S. Thomas Aq. T. xvii.
230 Peter de Tarantasia (Innocent F".). Not /mm.
and so it would not belong to all to be redeemed by Christ ;
but she is believed only to have been sanctified after the infu-
sion of her soul, because this has been bestowed on other
saints. And therefore it was especially fitting, that this should
be bestowed on the mother of "Wisdom, Whom nothing defiled
can touch, as it is in Wisd. vii."
Others exhibit the same traditional system, but
independently and alike, to whatever religious
order they belonged.
107. Peter de Tarantasia, Professor of Theology
at Paris, A.D. 1260 3; in 1276, during five months,
Innocent V., the first Dominican who was raised
to the Papacy : —
" 4 The nearer any one approaches to the Holy of Holies, so
much the greater degree of sanctification ought he to have, for
there is no approach to Him, except through sanctification.
But the mother approaches more than all to the Son, Who is
the Holy of Holies ; therefore she ought to have a greater
degree of sanctification after her Son. The degree of sanctifi-
3 " On account of his rare learning," Cave says. He was
the author of other large works, besides the Compendium Theo-
logiffi and the Comm. on the Sentences, which last De B.
quotes. His book on the Sentences was printed at Thoulouse
1652. There is no printed edition at Oxford, Cambridge, or
in the British Museum, nor any complete MS. of the work,
including the 3rd book, except in the library of Balliol College.
As De Band, condenses passages, I have translated the above
from the Cod. Bal. 61, to which Mr. Coxe gives the date, "sec.
xiv. ineunt." I have collated it with the extract given by S.
Antoninus, and that of De Alva, n. 153, who had compared a
Thoulouse MS.
4 In 3 Sent. dist. 3. q. 1. art. 1.
Cone, but sanctif. in womb, pious belief. 231
cation may be understood as fourfold : either that one have
sanctity (1) before conception and birth ; (2) after conception
and birth ; (3) in the conception itself and birth ; (4) in birth,
not in conception. For, * in conception and not in birth * is
impossible. The first degree is not possible, both because per-
sonal perfection (like knowledge or virtue) is not transfused
from the parents ; and also because in children the being of
grace cannot take place, before the actual being of nature, upon
which it is founded. The second degree is common to all,
according to the common law of sanctification through sacra-
ments. The third is peculiar to the Holy of Holies, in Whom
Alone all sanctification took place at once, conception, sancti-
fication, assumption. There remains then the fourth. But
this has four degrees ; because the foetus, when conceived in
the womb, may be understood to be sanctified either before
animation, or in the animation, or soon after the anima-
tion, or long after the animation. The first degree is
impossible, because according to Dionysius (de div. nom.
c. 12) ' Holiness is cleanness free from all defilement,
and perfect and immaculate ;' but the uncleanness of fault
is not expelled except through ' grace making gracious '
[acceptable], as darkness by light, of which grace the reason-
able creature only is the subject. The second degree was not
suitable to the Virgin, because either she would not have con-
tracted original sin, and so would not have needed the universal
sanctification and redemption of Christ, or if she had contracted
it, grace and fault could not have been in her at once. The
fourth degree also was not suitable to the Virgin, because it
did suit John and Jeremiah, and because it did not suit so
great holiness that she should have lingered long in sin, as
others; but John was sanctified in the sixth month (Luke i.).
But the third seems suitable and piously credible, although it
be not derived from Scripture, that she should have been sanc-
tified, soon after her animation, either on the very day or hour,
although not at the same moment."
" 5 Greater than this sauctification can none be conceived
Ibid, ad 2.
232 JEgidius of Zamora, MS. altered.
beneath God, or beneath Christ, Who is God ; but had she
been sanctified before, she had not contracted original sin, and
so would have been equal to Christ."
"° Since the Blessed Virgin is intermediate between the
Holy of Holies [Sanctum Sanctorum] and all other holy ones
[Saints], it was meet that she should have a middle degree of
sanctification. Since then Christ was ever free from all sin,
and some Saints were ever free from mortal sin, but not from
venial and original sin, it was meet that the Virgin should
have had original sin, but should never have committed actual
sin ; therefore that cleansing was not from sin, but from the
effect and consequence of sin."
108. Joannes JEgidius of Zamora, a Franciscan,
about A.D. 1274, was one of the most learned and
laborious Spaniards of his day. He was chosen by
Alphonso " the wise " to be preceptor to his son.
•The citation from his " Summa " illustrates how
MSS. were altered naturally to express a subse-
quent belief, yet not with any idea of falsification ;
for the MSS. were for private use only. In this
case, the substitution of " without " instead of
"with" "original sin" left the passage self-con-
tradictory.
"7Mary, then, although she was ordained from eternity
Mother of grace, according to the true oracles of the Prophets,
yet, since according to the flesh she was propagated of fleshly
parents, we believe that she was conceived with 8 sin, and, there-
6 Ib. q. 2. art. 1.
7 In his Summa, cap. de Maria, torn. vi. fol. 55. quater 4.
(Turr. P. 6. c. 23. f. 123.) De Alva u. 5. p. 213.
8 Deza, in what he believed to be the original, in a Francis-
can convent, says " that the word ' cum ' had been erased, and
1 sine ' written over it, as is clearer than light to any one, how-
ever weak his sight." Deza continues, "and afterwards he proves
John de Balbis. 233
fore the conception of such is not to be celebrated by the
Church, but in respect to the sanctification which took place
after the conception of natures, i. e. the union of the soul with
the body."
109. John de Balbis of Genoa, Dominican. He
finished his Catholicon A.D. 1286. From the num-
ber of editions, before or between 1460 and 1520,
it seems to have been a favourite book, until
about 1520, in Italy, France, and Germany. It was
also abridged in France. De Balbis also wrote
Postills on the four Gospels.
" 9 In Syriac, Mary means Lady, and well ; because she bore
the Lord of all, and the Virgin Mary was holy, before she was
born from the womb. And know, that the sanctification of the
B. Y. M. was more excellent than all sanctifications of others,
which is clear from this. For in the sanctification, which takes
place through the common law in the sacraments, the fault is
taken away, but the fomes remains, so far as it is inclining to
mortal and venial sin ; but in the sanctified from the womb,
the fomes remaineth not, so far as inclining to mortal sin,
but there only remaineth the inclination of the fomes to venial,
as is plain in Jeremiah and John Baptist, who had actual sin,
yet not mortal but venial. But in the Bl. V. the inclination
of the fomes was altogether taken away, both as to venial and
mortal."
" l To one is given grace which should repel, not only all
mortal, but all venial sins too, and this is the fulness of that
this at length taking formally the words of Bonaventura alleged
above, viz. ' this mode is more common, safer, more reasonable.' "
De Alva admits that the passage itself is inconsistent with the
word "sine," but says a MS. in the Franciscan convent at
Zamora had it (p. 244). The work was never printed.
* Catholicon v. Maria. Strasburg 1470 (no paging).
1 Ibid. v. Virtus.
234 Henri de Gandavo; time of original sin
special prerogative, which was in the Bl. V., according to which
she was full of God ; so that also there should be nothing in her
which should not be ordered to God. But in Christ there was
further given grace, perfecting Him not only as to all virtues,
but also as to all uses of virtues, and as to all effects of grace,
given gratis, and again as to all emotion of sin, not actual only,
but original also, and the power of sinning. For He could not
sin ; and this is the singular fulness of Christ."
110. Henri de Gandavo [H. Goethals of Ghent],
of the Sorbonne, of the Order of the Servites [i. e.
of the servants of the B. V.], "Archdeacon of
Tournay, a man among all the Doctors of his time
the most learned in Holy Scripture, and very subtle
in the philosophy of Aristotle, was so highly
esteemed in the University of Paris, that he was
called c Doctor Solennis ' throughout the Christian
world2." He lived from A.D. 1217—1293. He
was so far from being a follower of S. Thomas,
that he scarcely mentions him in his " 3 Book of
Illustrious Men."
His was a transition period, in which men, still
granting that the B. V. contracted original sin
at the moment of the infusion of her soul, were
anxious to minimize it to the utmost4. I make
some short extracts only : —
" The Conception of Christ is rightly to be celebrated on
ground of the Conception in regard to the instant of the Con-
ception as such, not only because it was the instant of His
2 Trithem. c. 497.
8 Labbe de Script. Eccl. i. 423.
4 Quodlib. xv. p. 382.
minimized, but admitted, 235
sanctification as Man, but also because His Conception was
miraculous by the virtue of the Holy Ghost. But if there
passed time between the Conception of the Virgin and her
sanctification, I say that the Conception of the Virgin is
not to be celebrated, on ground of the Conception, whereby
she was conceived to the world, either as to the act of the
Conception, because it was not holy, or as to the instant of
the Conception, because sanctification did not take place in it,
nor in time continuous to it. But, if the Conception of the
Virgin, whereby she was so conceived to the world, is to be
celebrated, this is only in regard to her future sanctification,
and the Conception whereby she was to be conceived to G-od,
that thus, by celebrating the feast of her Conception, reverence
may be shown to her person, on account of the dignity of the
sanctification, to which she was predestinated by God. And
this, as reverence is shown to the person of a king's eldest son,
not so much by reason of the royal stock from which he comes,
as because he expects to obtain the royal dignity. But be-
cause these things relate to facts, of which Holy Scripture says
nothing, saints or doctors little, viz., whether Mary was sanc-
tified immediately after the instant of her conception, so that
she should have only been infected with original sin for an indi-
visible instant, or after some interval, so that in all that interval
she should have been in original sin, I think that nothing
ought to be rashly pronounced — Because it is clear that it is a
token of greater love, or a greater token of great love, to endow
her quickly, and as soon as she could be endowed, than to wait
longer, if then she could be sanctified and cleansed from sin,
so that she should have been in the stain of original sin only
for an instant, right reason so determining (as it seems to me)
this may be piously thought. But what ? was it possible, ac-
cording to nature, that the Virgin, like other mere human
beings, should, in the moment when she was conceived, a
human being of seed according to the body, and the soul was
united to it, have truly contracted original sin, and have
remained in it only for an instant ? To me, it seems that this
is very possible."— P. 382.
" In what I have said of the Virgin, I could not but think
what seemed pious and worthy, and, saving the privilege of
236 Ulric of Strasburg ; B. V. sanctified
Christ, Who Alone was conceived Man in the womb, of clean seed
without original sin, I think that the privilege of the Virgin
was above all other human beings ; that, although she was
conceived in original sin as a human being of unclean seed,
yet that she did not remain in it, save for a moment ; and so,
though she was conceived in sin, she yet was not nourished in
sin in her mother's womb. But all others, even if sanctified in
the womb, were not only conceived in sin, but also nourished
in the womb for some space of time [in it]. As Innocent III.,
in a sermon on the Annunciation of the Virgin, expounding
what Elizabeth said, the child in my womb leaped for joy,
saith this of John Baptist."— P. 383.
111. Ulric of Strasburg [Engelbert] 5, who, "al-
though he was not a Master, having been overtaken
by death at Paris, while yet a Bachelor [having
been sent by his Order to lecture there], but most
renowned both for religion and learning, as the
many and glorious works published by him attest
evidently, after he had proved that no one could be
sanctified in the parents, nor in the conception
itself," says, —
" 6 We believe that the Mother of God speedily [subito]
after her animation was sanctified, so that she could truly say
that of Ecclus. 24, ' from the beginning of my duration in my
5 He was a disciple of Albertus Magnus, Prior Provincial of
Germany from 1272 — 1277; "wrote a Summa Theologia3 ex-
ceeding good," — Laur. Pignon, cat. 26, in Quetif, i., 356 ; "the
number of famous lecturers who went forth from his schools
attests his learning," — John de Friburg, in the first Prologue to
his Summa Confessorum.
0 Summa, L. v. c. 2, 3, 5, 7, 27 in Turr. P. 6, c. 29, f. 119,
and elsewhere. Alva, n. 312, grants this authority, although
he wrongly identifies him with Hugo Argentin.
speedily after animation. 237
natural being ' — i. e., a little after the beginning of her dura-
tion— ' and before ages,' as far as relates to priority of dignity,
' I was created,' i. e., produced from the nothing of sin to the
being of the grace of sanctification."
And below, in the same, he says, —
" From this cause of sanctification, the feast is kept in some
places [alicubi]. Although it is not approved by the Church, on
account of the error close by, yet it is endured, that others
should celebrate the Conception of the B. V., not referring
this joy to the conception of seeds, but of natures, which is
in the infusion of the soul, because, as is said, de divor. 1.
divortium, ' a wife, returned in brief space, doth not seem even
to have gone away.' Also, it is said in the decret. de poenit.
dist. i., ' It is accounted not at all to differ, when it differs
little.' "
Dionysius Carthusianus also quotes from his
Summa : —
" 7 Because that forecoming in the blessings of sweetness
appertains to the praise of Him Who forecomes, it follows
that the more praiseworthy any is made by the greater grace
of sanctification, the more this grace is accelerated in him.
Wherefore we believe that the mother of Christ, most worthy
of all praise, was sanctified soon after the animation — i. e., the
infusion of her soul. But John was sanctified sooner than
Jeremiah, yet later than Mary, viz., in the sixth month from
his conception, when his mother was visited by the mother
of Christ. Yet it is tolerated by the Church, that some
celebrate the Conception of the B. V., referring it to the con-
ception, not of seeds, but of natures, which was at the infusion
of the soul ; nor do they celebrate that in itself, because it was
7 In 3, dist. 3, q. 1. Dionysius himself, regarding the
Council of Basle, even after the withdrawal of the legates of
Eugenius, to have been a " general" Council, held its decision
to be final.
238 Richard Middleton.
in sin, but by reason of the sanctification near upon it. But
the sanctification of the glorious Virgin was threefold. The
first in her mother's womb ; the second in the Conception of
the Son of God, in which the fomes in her was entirely extin-
guished, and her whole nature, in soul and body, was perfectly
sanctified, that so the Body of Christ might be taken and formed
from her. Her third sanctification was from the indwelling of
the Son of God in her womb, "Who, as a consuming fire, rested
in her womb six months, as the fire in the bush, consuming in
her all possibility to evil, confirming her in the good of perfeo
tion, that not only could she not decline from good, but could
not pass from more perfect good to a state less perfect ; and
thus her whole nature was shone through with the light of
Divinity, and was resplendent with wondrous purity."
112. Richard Middleton (de media Villa) a
Franciscan, who had the honorary titles, "Doctor
solidus et copiosus, fundatissimus et autoratus."
He died about A.D. 1300.
" 8 The soul of the B. V., from its union with that flesh, con-
tracted original sin, as Anselm, about the middle of his 2nd
book, CurDeua homo, says of the B.V., that ' she was conceived
in iniquity, and in sins did her mother conceive her, and with
original sin was she born,' which is to be understood of the
birth in the womb. Augustine too, on Genesis, says of the flesh
of the Virgin, that it was conceived of the stock of the flesh of
8 L. iii. d. 3. q. 1. T. iii. p. 27. Brix. 1591. De Alva quotes
a number of authorities, that in advanced age he changed his
opinion and wrote for the immaculate Conception, and also
some lines on the Ave Maria, in which he takes the Scotist
ground of " fittingness." n. 270, pp. 717, 718. If he did
change, it was not on the ground of any contrary tradition, but
of what the Scotists thought most beseeming to Almighty
God.
JEgidius of Rome. 239
" 9 1 answer that all bodies will be reduced to ashes, except the
Body of Christ and the body of His mother, which were not
reduced to ashes ; which is most certain of the Body of Christ,
and is pious to believe as to the body of His mother. For as
original sin in the soul brings a debt of the separation of the
soul from its body, on account of its separation from God
through fault ; so the vice of the ' fomes ' in the flesh brings
a debt of its being reduced to ashes. "Whence, as all, except
Christ, have died or shall die, of debt, so to all human bodies,
except the body of Christ and His mother, the reduction to
ashes is due. For although the B. V. contracted original sin,
wherefore there was in her a debt to die, yet the fomes in her
never came to act, being, through the second sanctification,
totally removed from her."
113. J^gidius of Eome, an Augustinian Eremite,
Abp. of Bourges, A.D. 1294, who had the honorary
title of " doctor fundatissimus," and was entitled
after death " the key and doctor of sacred theology,
light bringing things doubtful to light V
After stating the contrary arguments in the
usual way, he says, —
" 2 But this position cannot hold, first, because Augustine, in
the de bapt. parv., maintains that Christ had not sin, because
He neither contracted original sin, nor added any of His own,
whereof he assigns as the reason, that He came apart from the
will of carnal desire and embrace of marriage, and adds, that He
took from the body of the Virgin not a wound but a medicament,
not what was to be healed, but whence He should heal. Whence
he concludes in the same place, that He Alone was without sin,
and that no member of His was without sin. To say, then,
B L. iv. dist. 43. q. 2.
1 Epitaph in Cave sub tit,
2 Quodlib. vi. q. 20.
240 JEgidius of Rome.
that the B. V. was not conceived in original sin, is to say that
she was not conceived by passion of the flesh, through marital
embrace, because all so born are conceived in sin. It is also to
say, that she was not a member of Christ, since Augustine
asserts that no member [of Christ] was without sin."
Then he quotes S. Augustine on S. John, " Behold
the Lamb of God/' &c., and makes the same infer-
ence. " The B. V. then, because she was conceived
according to marital embrace like the rest of man-
kind, was also conceived in original sin."
Subsequently, arguing that between opposite
motions there is an interval ; if a stone fall on the
ground, there must yet be an interval between the
downward and upward motions, during which in-
terval it must be on the ground, he adds, —
"Now let us see herein the great praise of the Virgin
therefrom, that we lay down that she was conceived under
original sin, whether she was in such original sin for an instant
only, or for an imperceptible time. For a short and imper-
ceptible time is accounted as an instant, and because it is more
reasonable, that a thing cannot proceed from one opposite to
another without intervening time, and not through other time
than imperceptible ; we shall hold it as said more reasonably
that the B. Y. was conceived under original sin, and in her
conception — marital embrace intervened, and under its original
fault she was during sometime, although it is very credible that
that time was very brief, and as it were imperceptible."
" Let us then commend the Blessed Virgin, yet not so, as
to deny her to have been a member of Christ ; yea, it rather
appertains to the great privilege of her singular excellence,
that she was the only one who bore a man conceived without
original sin. But if the B. V. had been conceived without
original sin, this privilege would not belong singularly to her,
but to S. Anne also, who bore her."
Cone, in orig. sin, no ground agst. the Feast. 241
He holds that the Feast of the Conception
might still be fittingly held : —
" We shall say that a thing is praiseworthy in an inferior,
which is not so in a superior. For in Christ it would not have
been praiseworthy to have been born in original sin, because He
was not conceived by marital embrace ; but in those who are so
conceived, because in this way they become members of Christ,
as freed from original sin by grace, although to be in original
sin is not in itself praiseworthy, yet it appertaineth to praise as
they become members of Christ. For one doth not become a
member of Christ otherwise than as he is freed from original
sin by Christ. "Whence also Aug. in the de Bapt. parv., setting
forth the likeness of the serpent lifted up in the wilderness as a
type of Christ, says, ' If innocency in your own case moves you,
deny not that guilt was contracted from the first parent."
114. f"Keginald, Franciscan, Archbishop of
Eouen ;" i.e. Odo Rigaldi. According to the Sam-
marthani 3, his holiness of life gained him the title
of " regula vivendi." He died AJX 1275, or 1276.
" * As impurity, if it had not been sanctified, would derogate
from the Virgin herself, whose privilege it was that she alone
sine viro conceived (as Bernard says), and therefore did not
transmit original sin to her offspring, so if the virgin had been
conceived without original sin, it would have derogated from
her Son Himself."
115. fHugo Gallicus, an eminent Dominican,
Archbishop and Cardinal of Ostia.
3 Gall. Christ, xi. 7. They mention also his work on the
Sentences. See also on him, Wading A. 1236. n. 6. A. 1276.
n. 5.
4 In 3. Sent. d. 3. Turr. P. 6. c. 30. f. 121. v. He wrote com-
mentaries on the Sentences, beginning, " Qu&ritur utrum plures
sint veritates ab seterno," &c. (Oudin. iii. 451), and so, different
from that of Eigaltus Diacon. beg. " Veteris et novae legis,"
which De Alva (n. 266. p. 711) alleged to be the same.
Q -i-
242 John of Naples' answers
" 5 From the corruption of original sin the B. V. was
cleansed in her mother's womb, as relates to infection and
guilt, because she would still have descended into limbus, had
she departed before the Conception of the Son of God, from
the debt of original sin which was never fully purged before
the Coming of Christ. Whence, at His Coming, being filled
with the grace of the Holy Spirit, she was altogether cleansed
from that corruption, and so was twice sanctified."
116. John of Naples, "Doctor solennis Parisi-
ensis," taught at Paris, A.D. 1315 ; died probably
A.D. 1330. "He had lived most holily, was re-
markable for his life, learning, eloquence6." S.
Antoninus quotes him several times in answer to
the arguments alleged for the Imm. Cone.7
He retorted the argument drawn from S.
Anselm's saying, that it was meet that the B. V.
should have the highest purity beneath God, that
if the B. Y. had not contracted original sin, her
purity would be, not beneath, but equal to that of
her Son, Who is God 8, adding, —
" Nor does the instance from the good Angels hold, for in
them there cannot be sin contracted from origination, but
all are created immediately by God."
To another argument from fittingness, he re-
torted,—
6 « In 3. Sent. d. 3." Turrecr. Part, 6. c. 29. fol. 118 v. The
writer cannot be identified. " Hugo Metensis " lectured on
the Sentences at the same time as S. Thorn. Aq. Bula3us,
Hist. Univ. Par. iii. 216.
6 Quetif, i. 567.
7 Summa Theol. Tit. 8. c. 2. t. i. 551—554.
8 See ab. p. 166.
to the Scotist arguments. 243
" It was not fitting, that the natural conception of any
human being, not even of the Virgin-mother, should in immu-
nity from original sin be equalled to the supernatural Concep-
tion of Christ."
To the argument that she would be " freed and
redeemed in a more noble way than others, if it
were provided that she should not fall into slavery,
than that she should be raised when fallen and be
redeemed, being a servant of sin," S. Antonine
says, John of Naples and others answer, —
" Redemption or salvation is only of one existing. For as
nothing properly has being, when it exists only in its cause,
unless it has being in itself, so neither can one be said pro-
perly to be redeemed or saved, being under spiritual slavery,
which exists only by fault in the parents, and not in the person
himself9. However much the Virgin might have been pre-
served from original sin, she could not be said to have been
redeemed and saved, unless she had at some time been subject
to [original] sin, not in the person of her parents only, but in
her own."
The ground, adds S. Antonine, according to him
and John of Policrates, is this : —
" A thing, which was once mine and afterwards is not, is
said to be redeemed [bought back] ; but a thing which never
was mine is said to be bought. But a thing which always was
and is mine, cannot be said to be bought, or to be bought back
(or redeemed). If, then, the B. V. was never subject to any
sin, then she was always God's, and so was not [bought back
9 A child already existing in her mother's womb might be
said to be redeemed, and would be redeemed, if her mother was
redeemed from slavery. One could not say so of one conceived
many years afterwards, although, if the mother had remained
in slavery, it too would have been born a slave*
Q2
244 JoJin of Naples' answers.
or] redeemed. And the same as to salvation, because it pre-
supposes the fall or infirmity of sin."
In answer to the argument from the festival of
the Conception of the B. V., he said (according to
the physics of that time), —
" The festival is not the festival of her Conception, as those
say, since it is nine months before her Nativity, on which day
the soul, which is the subject of sanctity, was not infused.
But rather it is a feast of thanksgiving (as in the old law was
the feast of Pentecost, and in the new the feast of Epiphany),
whereas no new holiness was conferred, but the Church gives
thanks for benefits, and so in that in question."
In answer to the [alleged] revelation and vision as
to S. Bernard, &e., John of Naples says, that " they
are fantastic visions, which are not to be believed."
In answer to the objection, that one who refused
to celebrate the Conception was not devout to the
B. V., he answered, " 10 the Roman Church is sup-
posed to be a true lover of the Virgin, and yet it
does not celebrate this solemnity."
Turrecremata quotes him, " l having, in his
Quodlibet [vi.] q. 11, narrated both opinions, he
says thus, The opinion of those who say that the
B. V. was conceived in original sin, I hold for the
present, as more consonant to Holy Scripture."
De Bandelis gave the summary thus : " The
10 Catharinus Opusc. 3, test. 4, f. 59 in Alva Sol Verit. n. 182.
p. 547.
1 Ttirr. [L. vi.] c. 29. f. 119 v., quoting from a MS. of his
Quodlibets in the Dominican Convent at Naples.
Guido of Perpignan. 245
B. V. was conceived in original sin, both because
she was descended seminally from Adam, and
because Scripture excepteth none but Jesus Christ ;
also because Augustine, Gregory, Pope Leo, An-
selm, Bernard, expressly to the letter, say this 2."
De Alva owned them to be correct.
117. Guido of Perpignan, General of the Car-
melites 1318, made " General Inquisitor of the
Faith " 1321, Bishop of Majorca, afterwards of
Elne (Perpignan).
Alegre says 3 he was also called " Guido of Paris,
because at Paris he received the honour of the
Doctorate amid such admiration of the doctors of
the city and university, on ground of his singular
and unheard-of wisdom, that he was called 4 Doctor
Parisiensis ' as a title of his own. He was, as
Ileverard the Carthusian attests, among the wisest
fathers of his time, remarkable for his wisdom,
virtue, and most transparent religion." Alegre
mentions his eight books of Physics, his "De
Anima," a work on the Sentences, Quodlibets, and
2 Quetif (i. 567) says that De Alva, in a later edition of his
work, Ead. 273, col. 1898—1906, gave his " Quodlibet vi. q.
11, on the Conception of the B. V., owning that he was quoted
rightly by Turrecremata, De Bandelis, and their followers."
In the edition of 1660, ver. 182, Alva had denied it, supposing
that the Quodlibets had been published at Naples in 1618,
whereas they were the " Quaestiones Varia? " which were there
published, in which the passages quoted from the Quodlibets
naturally did not occur.
3 Parad. Carmel. act. 14, c. 58.
246 Guido of Perpignan, on the teaching
a book to Pope John XXII., against Heresies,
" whose teaching all Doctors of the better stamp
highly value, and his own wisdom, as if he had
come down from above."
" 4 Is Christ, "Who is the Virtue of the most Highest and
Very God, Son of the Father, born holy, because He was con-
ceived not of human seed, but of the operation of the Holy
Ghost ? 'Read we that Jeremiah was sanctified in his mother's
womb, and John, yet in his mother's womb, was filled with
the Holy Spirit, and consequently born holy ? And yet it is
known that they were conceived by carnal concumbency from
human seed. "We believe also that the Bl. Mary was sanctified
in her mother's womb. And if John is sanctified in his
mother's womb, because he was elected to be the Forerunner
of Christ, to point Him out, much more was the Virgin to be
sanctified, who was elected to be the Mother of God and the
Tabernacle which the Most High sanctified. But Christ is
born holy in one way, others otherwise ; because Christ is so
born holy, that in His Conception He contracted no original
fault ; but others, even the Virgin Mary, although sanctified
in her mother's womb, were so born holy, that they yet con-
tracted original fault 5. For the Angel concluded that Christ
is born holy, because not from knowledge of man, but from the
operation of the Holy Ghost, the Virgin Mary, in whom the
virtue of God overshadowed Himself, conceived Christ Himself.
And this ground Augustine pursues (De Nupt. et Cone. i. 6),
4 Quatuor unum, i.e. quatuor Evangelistaruin Concordia on
S.Lukei. 35, pp. 18, 19. Col. 1631. S. Antonine of Florence
alleges him as saying that the B. V. was conceived in original
sin, in his 3rd Quodlibet.
1 In a note, the editor says, " The opinion which the most
reverend author here defends with all his might according to
the exigency of his age, in which he lived and wrote, although
it is not at this time very scholastic and regular, we did
not think it allowable, for reverence towards him, to limit or
expunge." P. 19.
of Holy Scripture and the Fathers. 247
and Ambrose (on Luke ii. c. 7), and Augustine (De Nupt. et
Cone. i. fin. and on Gen. ad lit. x. 18) [Fulgentius] De Fid. ad
Pet. [Aug.] Horn. 4 on John, and De Nat. et Gratia, treating
on Rom. 3, 'All have sinned, and need the glory of God,' he
exeepts none, neither the Bl. Y. ; nay, he includes all under
sin and as needing the grace of Christ, ' The grace of Christ
finds all sinners, Who came Alone without sin. Again, Augus-
tine, De Civ. Dei, treating of that of the Apostle, Eom. v.,
' Therefore all were dead, and one died for all.' Also good is
the saying of the Apostle, Bom. v., ' Because through the first
man sin entered unto all and death by sin ;' whence, according
to Aug., no one died who did not contract original sin, except
Christ Alone, Who, being conceived, without seed of man, of
the Holy Ghost, did not contract sin. Whence Eom. v., ' as
the sin of one passed upon all to condemnation, so the
righteousness of One passeth upon all to justification,' where
the gloss saith, that as, besides Adam, there was no one who
was not born [in sin], so, besides Christ, there is none who was
not re-born from fault. Therefore he says ' all ' and ' all.' "
In the course of his answer to the one passage
alleged from S. Anselm, he says, —
" It was the privilege of the Son to be conceived of a virgin
without man, and so, according to the saints, without original
fault. Therefore, as it was becoming that the Bl. Mary should
not be conceived of a virgin without man, in order that this
purity might be reserved to Christ Alone, so it was not be-
coming that she should be conceived without sin, whence
Bernard says, because she was conceived of man, therefore she
was conceived in original sin."
118. Hervseus Natalis, called by S. Antonine 6
" most subtle in logic and philosophy ;" Licentiate of
Theology at Paris, 1307 ; Provincial of the Domi-
nicans, 1309 ; General, 1318; died 13237.
6 Summa Hist, xxiii. 11. 2. T. 3, p. 681.
' Quetifi. 533, 534.
248 Hervceus Natalis, answers Scotist arguments ;
The positions which he has to combat are ab-
stract : —
" s 1) That whatever excellence can be attributed to the B. V.
without prejudice to the Faith and Holy Scripture, and the
authority of the saints, ought to be attributed to her ; 2) that it
is not irreconcilable (as it appears) that she should be at the
same time in original sin and in grace ; nay, that this seems
necessary, because that which expels and that which is expelled
are together; but grace expels fault; so then, in the same
instant of the creation of the soul, the B.Y. could incur ori-
ginal fault and be sanctified by grace. 3) The B. V. ought to be
sanctified as soon as possible ; but this would not have been,
had she not been sanctified in the first instant of her creation.
" But that to lay down that, in the instant of the creation
of the soul, she was sanctified, is not repugnant to any of
these."
The arguments from fittingness he meets with
arguments equally abstract : —
" Although the purity of the mother pertains to the honour
of the Son, yet it pertaineth more to the honour of God, that
the whole human nature, descending from Adam by generation,
should need redemption by Him, than that some should need
it, some or some one should not need it. And it more per-
taineth to His honour, that He Alone should have died, not
owing death, but the Deliverer of all from death by His Death,
than that any one should be assumed not to owe death, nor to
need to be redeemed from death by the Death of Christ.
These things appertain more to the honour of Christ than
the purity of His mother as relates to the avoiding of original
sin. For, 1) that appertains most to the honour of Christ which
appertains to the general influence of His goodness to others,
&c. 2) That that appertains most to the glory of Christ,
which appertains to His honour, as He is God. But the
general influence of the Eedemption appertains directly to the
8 Quodl. iv. q. ult. Venice, 1486.
rests on Scr. and tradition agst. Imm. Cone. 249
honour of Christ, as Ho is G-od ; because this universality is
laid down as the reason why a Divine Person was incarnate ;
but the purity of His Mother appertaineth directly to the
honour of Christ, as He is Man, because, although the B. V. is
the Mother of God, she is not the mother of God as God.
" If it be said here that she would have been redeemed by
Christ — granted, that she was without original sin, because
«he would have been freed from the future captivity of fault, it
does not hold ; for, although it could be said that any thing
was preserved from a future evil, yet one cannot be said pro-
perly to have been redeemed or liberated, unless he had been
in act first sold or subjugated to that evil."
But "that it is in fact to be held that the B.V.
was conceived in original sin," he says, " it is
proved, because that is to be held in fact in this
matter, which is most fitting, and most agrees with
the sayings of the saints and of the Scriptures, such
as Rom. v., and for the saints S. Bernard, Fulgen-
tius, c. 23, 40."
119. | John de Poliaco, a Doctor of Paris about
1 320. His teaching, that those who had confessed
to the regulars, having a general licence for hearing
confessions, must confess again to their parish
priest, and that the Pope could not dispense with
this, founded on his interpretation of the Lateran
Council, " Omnes utriusque sexus," as being a
general Council, was condemned by John XXII.,
A.D. 1321, and retracted by him (Raynald A. 1321,
n. 37). I know not on what ground he is said to
be the same as John Policratis, whom S. Antonine
joins with " ^gidius, the most excellent Doctor of
the Order of the Eremites, and Guido of the
250 " Imm. Cone, heresy, as agst Scr. and trad."
Order of Carmelites," and adds, " who all adduce
the authority of the Apostle in Rom. Hi., c All
have sinned,' and they assign their reasons V
Turrecremata cites him thus : " Magister John
de Poliaco, a secular, a Magister of Paris, says in
his Quodl. 3, q. 3, —
" <2 It seems to me that it could not be held by any one as an
opinion, but should rather be accounted as a heresy, that the
B. V. did not contract original sin, since it is against Holy
Scripture and the sayings of the saints.' And, after many alle-
gations of H. Scripture and Doctors, as Bom. 3, 'All have
sinned,' with the gloss of Augustine, and Horn. 5, ' As through
one man sin entered into the world,' with the gloss, and Eph. 2,
adding many sayings of Augustine and S. Thomas in 3, he
subjoins, —
" Since then that which is against all Scripture cannot be
held probably as an opinion, nay, as far as it is against Holy
Scripture, ought to be held as heretical, who is of such pre-
sumption and boldness, as to presume to assert the contrary
of the aforesaid testimonies, which are grounded for ever?
But if any one were to presume, he must be proceeded with,
not by argument, but in some other way."
120. John de Bacon, or Bacon thorpe, Provincial
of the Carmelites in England from A.D. 1329 ; died
A.D. 1346. " Doctor resolutus, a man most learned
in the Divine Scriptures, excellently learned both
in civil law and secular philosophy, distinguished in
the University of Paris for conversation as well as
learning 3."
1 Summa, P. 1, Tit. 8, c. 3, p. 551.
2 In Turr., P. 6, c. 28, p. 112.
9 Trithem. c. 615. See also Alegre, Parad. Carmel. iv. 98.
De Bacon; sayings of S. Aug. on Imm. Cone. 251
" * The authorities of Augustine against Pelagius prove that
all contracted original sin, except the Son of the King Alone,
i. e. Christ ; and it is certain that, in that whole process, he
argues about actual contracting or not contracting, which fol-
lows on the union of the soul, because he speaks of the con-
tracting of the person, but the person includes the soul ; there-
fore, &c.
" 2. Also, Augustine, arguing against the Pelagians, who
simply denied original sin, and that it was not formally in any
one, proves against them, that original sin passes to posterity, by
means of authorities, which denote the generation of the person
by propagation. ' Behold I was conceived in iniquities/ &c.,
'Man born of a woman.' But it is certain that the
Person of Christ Alone was conceived without propagation ;
therefore Christ Alone was He who did not formally contract
it.
" 3. The error of the Pelagians was, that little ones are
baptized, not because they contracted original fault, but be-
cause they would be able to sin, when they should come to the
use of free will. Against these he argues, c That then Christ
did not come to save all, but only adults.' Then I argue,
1 Aug. means, that if there were only some necessity or prone-
ness to sin in the persons of infants, and not original sin for-
mally, then Christ was not the Saviour of all. But these mean
this as to the B. V. ; therefore Christ was not her Saviour,
i.e. not the Saviour of all, which is an error.'
" Then, too, a mode of arguing is not to be allowed as to the
B. V., whereby, with the like or greater probability, the
Pelagians could maintain their error against Aug. But the
Pelagians would say, that as in her there was a necessity of
contracting it, but on account of preventing grace she did not
contract it, so in infants ; and it follows, ' But on ground of
preventing and perpetual righteousness, they did not contract
it, until they should come to the use of free-will, because then
first they could be just or unjust.'
" 4. On the c authority of Fulgentius ' [and the same applies
4 In 3. d. 30, q. 1, art. 2.
252 De Bacon; peril of explaining as what might be,
to other places], ' are born with original sin,' he observes, ' He
speaks of the birth of the person, not of the conception of
seeds only,' and so ' all have sinned, and all need the grace of
God.' 'Observe,' he says, 'that every man is subject to
wickedness.' He speaks of a fact, not of a necessity of con-
tracting original sin ; and this is clear by the authority which
he cites, which is of fact. ' All have sinned ;' he speaks of a
fact.'1
De Bacon argues further against the Scotist
solution 5, that she would have contracted it, but
for the redemption by Christ ; that this " preserva-
tion " is not redemption ; that it could not be said
that there was any necessity of contracting original
sin; and argues, —
" It is an abuse, yea a peril to faith, to adopt a mode of argu-
ing which might, if applied to cases ex simili, be the occasion
of great heresies ; but if, when Scripture spoke absolutely, it
was to be explained of something potential only, then it might
be said of our Saviour, that He did not suffer in fact those
penalties of sin, hunger, thirst, weariness, but the Scripture
only said this, on account of the necessity of suffering, i. e.
that He had our unhappy nature, which of necessity suffers
these things. In like way, as to His being ' very heavy and sor-
rowful, even unto death,' or of the Passion and Death itself,
that He did not in fact suffer. Also of the Baptism of
infants, with the Pelagians, that in fact they do not contract
[original sin], but that the Scriptures, which prove this, only
say that they contracted them, on account of the necessity of
contracting them ; and countless absurdities might be ad-
duced.
" Also, as P. Lombard proved that Christ did not contract
original [sin], because, although that nature which He took
of the B. V. was first subject to original sin, and so that there
8 In Aureolus.
that which Scripture states as fact. 253
was a necessity of contracting it, but that it was therefore
sanctified, that He should not contract it ; so, in order that
the authorities of the saints might not be to us a cause of
error, they ought to have made the distinction as to the
B. V., that there was in her first a necessity of contracting
it, but that she did not, in fact, contract it, because she was
sanctified in the first instant ; but this neither the Master
(Peter Lombard) nor the authorities alleged above hint, and
that is much."
121. f Joannes Eicardi, Bishop of Dragonara,
or Tragonara, in S. Italy, a Franciscan, between
A.D. 1311— 1340 6.
" 7The first sanctification of the V. M. was in her mother's
womb, which had three effects; viz. the expiation of the
original fault, and infusion of grace, and so much restric-
tion of the ' fomes ' that she could not be led into any sin,
although the fomes itself remained in Mary, according to its
essence8."
122. In 1340, Alvarus Pelagius, a Franciscan,
and a Portuguese Bishop, and, at an earlier period,
Apostolic Penitentiary, could still speak of the
belief in the Immaculate Conception of the B. V.
as modern. He was writing against the heresies of
the Beghardi.
6 Quetif, i. 470, in answer to De Alva.
7 Compend. Theol. beginning " Veteris et novae Legis." L. iv.
in the rubric "on the sanctification of the B. V." in Turr.
P. 6. c. 30. f. 122. He took much from Hugo de Argentina,
Quetif.
8 De Bandelis adds, "And therefore the feast of the Nativity
is celebrated, not that of her Conception, except by reason of
the sanctification, in some parts."
254 Alv. Pel., Sanctif. of B. F. in womb not Imm.
" 8 In regard to the most blessed Mother [of Christ] the
saints hold, and especially Augustine, that she did not sin even
venially in this life ; yet she was conceived in original sin, just
as other human beings, because from that saying of her father
David, ' Behold I was conceived in iniquities,' no one is ex-
cepted save Christ, Who was conceived, not of human seed, but
of the Holy Ghost, and in the womb of the Virgin, which was
already sanctified. But our Lady was conceived of the seed of
both parents, Joachim and Anna, as all other women, not of
the Holy Ghost, as her Son. And therefore she was conceived
in original sin, as Bernard proves at length in the Epistle
which he wrote to the Canons of Lyons, in which he censures
them for celebrating the feast of our Lady, which ought not to
be done, or, if done, should be referred to her sanctification in
the womb ; for, according to Bernard, she was holy before she
was born, whence Augustine too [S. Fulgentius], De Eide,
ad Petr. (see ab.). Tor this maketh what is read De Cons. Di. iv.
c. 2 in verbo miraculo, gloss., ' ut in beata Maria,' and Di. iii. c, 1
in gloss, de festo, and caus. xxvii. q. ii. c. 10 [S. Aug. De Nupt.
et Conc.i. 11] ; and all the old Theologians hold this judgment,
viz. Alexander [de Hales], Thomas [Aquinas], in his ivth. and
iind. book, Bonaventura, and Eichard [a S. Victore]. Although
some new Theologians, departing from the common mind of the
Church, endeavour to hold the contrary, being really indevout
to our Lady, but wishing to appear, her devotees, comparing
her thus in a manner to God and to His Son. Whose novel
and fantastic opinion be utterly cancelled from the faithful !
For it denies the sanctification, against that which the Church
holds, that there was that sanctification, and so, according to
Bernard, she was holy, i. e. sanctified in the womb, before she
was born out of the womb. Tor if she had not been conceived
8 De Planctu Ecclesia?, L. ii. art. 52. B. fol. 169. Lugduni,
1517. He revised the work twice, in 1335 and 1840. Sub-
scription of the author : — " With my own hand I corrected it
A.D. 1335, in Algarva of Portugal, where I am Bishop. A
second time I corrected it, in S. James of Compostella, A.D.
1340."
Cone. ; prayer as to her sanctif. at Rome. 255
in original sin, which is contracted in the infusion of the soul
(De Cons, Di. iv. c. 146 in gloss ii.), sanctification would not
have been necessary, as neither in Christ. And therefore the
Eoman Church does not keep the feast of the Conception,
although it tolerates that it be held in some places, especi-
ally in England ; but it does not approve it. For what is per-
mitted is not approved (iv. d. c. 6 fin.), or that feast ought to
be referred to the sanctification of the Virgin, not to her Con-
ception, as was said. And so says the prayer, which is said in
this feast at Borne in S. Mary major, ' Deus, qui sanctificationem
Virginis,' &c., as I saw and heard when I preached there on
that sanctification, upon that feast of the Sanctification, which
takes place in December, fifteen days before the feast of the
Nativity.9 For this truth, maketh that of Solomon, Prov.
9 The passage is absolutely unquestionable. Turrecremata
quoted, not the one statement about the Church of St. Mary
Major, but the whole context from a MS. (for the work was
not published until six years after his death, A.D. 1468) ; and
De Alva, who quoted also the whole at length, found fault only
(as his way was) with minute details in Turrecremata's citation,
and says, " I have seen it in many libraries in MS." Further,
it occurred in the first edition of Alvarus' works, Ulm, 1474,
in the carefully revised edition, Lyons, 1517, and in that of
Venice, 1560 (as I have seen). 1) It is no argument against this,
that in some 3 MSS. the words are omitted, since we have had
many instances, in which persons, bona fide, expunged on this
subject from MSS. what was not consonant with the current
belief. 2) With regard to Alvarus' accuracy, it is to be
observed, that when he wrote his celebrated work, " De
Planctu Ecclesiaj," he was Penitentiary at the Court of Rome.
The work was revised only in Portugal and addressed to Card.
Gomez. "Wading cites a statement of his as authentic, because
he was then " present in the Court." He is spoken of as " a
most celebrated Doctor of Spain, most known from that dis-
tinguished work of his, ' De Planctu Ecclesia?.' " If we were
to be called upon to disbelieve what such a man says that he
" saw and heard " in public worship, in which he was himself
256 Accuracy of statement of Alvarus Pelaglus.
xxv. 4, ' Take away the rust from the silver, and a most
pure vessel shall go forth.' That most pure vessel was the
Virgin, which, the rust of original sin having been washed
away [abluta, probably ' taken away,' ablata], by sanctification
wrought in the womb, went forth most pure from the womb.
And Psalm xlv, [xlvi.] 5, 'The Most High sanctified His
tabernacle.' The Virgin Mary was that sanctified tabernacle of
God, according to Ecclus. xxiv. 8. ' And He "Who created me
rested in my tabernacle.' Aug. makes for this in the sermon
the preacher, because it could not be found in any book, nearly
300 years afterwards, ear- and eye-witness would not count
for much. 3) In regard to the statement itself, it should be
observed, that Alvarus does not say that those at Rome called
" the Feast of the Conception of the B. V. " by the name, " the
Feast of the Sanctification." He himself calls it what he held
it to be. So far, then, the statement of De Alva, whom Perrone
quotes (De Iinm. B.V. Concept, c. xv. § 3. Pareri, p. 426), " that
in countless Breviaries or Missals, whether Roman or other, he
had not found any, in which the Feast of the Conception was
entitled 'the Feast of the Sanctification,'" is irrelevant.
Alvarus does not say thtit it was. What Alvarus does allege
is, that there was in his time a collect, used at Rome on the
Festival, beginning, " O God, "Who the sanctification of the
Virgin," &c., where the word " Conception " would have stood
in later times. But there is nothing strange that the word
" Sanctification " should be obliterated. Nay, when ordered to
be disused, it would be obliterated of course. The later Car-
thusian statutes directed the word " Conception " to be substi-
tuted for that of " Sanctification." They would then, of neces-
sity, obliterate in their Breviaries a word which was to be
disused. But what is disused, speedily disappears. In despite
of the commonness of printing, the Latin ritual from which
Luther translated into German his first Baptismal office, has
long since entirely disappeared, and, with it, the original of the
2nd collect in our own service. It disappeared in a much shorter
time than that between the time of Alvarus and the search
made by direction of Paul V. See too Carthus. Stat. bel. p. 368.
Two aspects of Fest. of the Conception. 257
on the Purification, ' He Alone was born without sin, to Whom
without embrace of man, not the concupiscence of the flesh, but
obedience of the mind, gave being V This also Aug. deter-
mines on Gen. ad lit., and [the decretal] d. ii. si enim, at the
end. And we have taught that, God excepted, every creature
is under fault, &c. The Master of the Sentences holds the
123. fPaulus Salucius de Perusio, "a most
celebrated Doctor of the Carmelites," about A.D.
1350. " 2 His book on tbe Sentences is praised by
all." " 3 He was a Professor and most eminent
expositor of botb civil and canon law ; and knew
Greek and Latin perfectly," &c.
" 4 It is firmly to be held, that the B. Y. was conceived in ori-
ginal sin, both because she was born by concumbency of male
and female, and because Christ Alone was conceived without
sin, as Augustine and Jerome say ; also, because she derived
the desert of death, as Augustine says ; also, because she was
redeemed by the Death of Christ, as the rest."
De Bandelis adds tbe following illustration, wbicb
is too characteristic not to be an original : —
" Yet the Conception of the Virgin might be considered in a
two-fold way ; first, in the order to the contraction of original
sin, and thus it is not to be celebrated. And in this way Ber-
nard understands it, and the gloss on the decree de Consecr.
Dist. 3. c. 1. In another way, it may be considered in the
order to the future sanctification and the Incarnation of Christ ;
1 The thought is common in S. Aug. ; the words are from
a sermon, put together out of S. Aug., App. v. 128, Ben.
2 De Alva, n. 238. He says, " I could not find it at Eome
or Perugia."
8 Tritb., n. 634.
4 « In 3 Sent. dist. 3." Turr. P. 6. c. 3. f. 124.
R -*-
258 Durandus a S. Porciano ; Concept.
and then it may be celebrated. As medicine, as far as it is
bitter, is odious and detestable, but, as far as it is inducive of
health, is loveable and praiseworthy. And a Church is vene-
rated, not as it is of stone, but as it is consecrated and dedi-
cated to Grod. And a Prelate, as a sinner, is worthy of vitupe-
ration, but, as having jurisdiction and sitting on Moses' seat, is
to be honoured."
124. fNicolas Treveth, an Oxford Doctor, died
A.D. 1328, about 70.
" 5 The day of her Conception then is not so celebrated, as if
it were to be supposed that the B. V. completed her Conception
without original sin. For this would be erroneous, whether
for that time, when in act she contracted original sin, or in
regard to that whereby she was in the potentia to contract it."
125. Durandus a S. Porciano, "Doctor resolu-
tissimus," although a Dominican, can hardly be
counted as influenced by S. Thomas, because
"6 having first been a follower of the doctrine of
S. Thomas, he afterwards wrote against it." He
began his work when young, finished it when old.
He was Magister of the Apostolic Palace under
John XXII. and Bp. of Puy and Meaux, A.D.
1320.
He meets the abstract arguments, such as were
s Quodlib. 3. q. 4. in Turr. p. 6. c. 29. f. 119 v. De Alva,
n. 227, doubted the existence of the Quodlibeta. Quetif
(i. 563) says that they were quoted by Henry of Erfurt, who
died A. 1370, and were still extant in the time of Bunderius.
6 S. Antonin. Summa Hist. Tit. xxiii. c. xi. § 2. S. Antonin.
mentions there the nephew of Durandus, known as Durandellus,
who defended S. Thomas against Durandus. He too is quoted
as holding the same doctrine as to the Immac. Cone.
of B. V. not 1mm., for not of the Holy Ghost. 259
used by Scotus, that it was " fitting " that the Con-
ception of the B. V. should be Immaculate, by
arguments, in form equally abstract, but still
turning on the difference in the mode of Concep-
tion, so often insisted upon by those before him.
" 7 Although the B. Y. could have been preserved from sin, it
was not fitting that she should be preserved. The reason
whereof is, that a singular Conception ought to be endowed
with a singular privilege ; but the Son of Grod, according to
His Humanity, had a singular Conception, because He was
conceived not of man but of the Holy Spirit. Therefore He
ought to have a singular privilege ; but He would not have
had it, unless His Conception Alone had been without original
sin: therefore it was not fitting that the Conception of any
other, even His mother, should be endowed with the same
privilege. And this is confirmed ; because, as it is said
(John iii.), 'that which is born of flesh is flesh, and that which
is born of the Spirit is spirit,' so, in like way, what is
conceived of flesh is flesh, and what is conceived of Spirit
is spirit. Since then Christ Alone was conceived of the
Spirit, but the B. V. and all the rest were conceived of
flesh, i.e. according to the common way of the flesh, it was
fitting that the Conception of Christ Alone should have
nothing contrary to the Spirit. But the B. V. and all the
rest, as they were not privileged to be conceived of the Holy
Spirit, so they had original fault which wars against the
Spirit, and thereby the answer to the reasons of others is plain."
He says that he has read no other authority of S. Anselm than
this, " which yet, rightly understood, makes for us."
Having, then, met the_abstract arguments and
retorted the inference drawn from the statement of
S. Anselm, he argues that the B.V. was not pre-
served from original sin, upon authority, alleging
7 L. 3. dist. 3. q. 1.
B 2
260 Scr. excepts not B. V.; her sanctlf. celebrated.
Romans v., S. Fulgentius, and S. Augustine. On
the words, " in whom all have sinned," he says, —
"But he who says, 'all,' excepts nothing. And if it be
said, ' therefore Christ was not excepted,' it does not follow,
because the Apostle is speaking of those who descend in the
way of nature from Adam; moreover the Apostle himself
excepts Christ in that same chapter, that, ' as through the sin of
one man many were made sinners, so, through the righteous-
ness of One shall many be made righteous.' "
Then, in answer to the objection, " the Church
holds no festival, except as to what is holy, but
many Churches make a festival of the Conception
of the Bl. Mary," he says, —
" 8 As to the festival of her Conception, it is either not
rightly kept or not rightly named. For a feast may be held of
her sanctification, yet, on the ground that it is not altogether
certain when she was sanctified (as will be said afterwards), but
it is certain when she was conceived, therefore, putting what is
certain for what is uncertain, that is called the feast of her con-
ception which ought to be called the feast of her sanctificatiou."
126. Gregory of Ariminum, a Paris Doctor,
General of the Augustinian Eremites, A.D. 1357: —
" ° The question is not, whether it was possible for the B. Y.
to be conceived without original sin, but whether in fact she
was conceived without it. Since no certainty can be had
hereon through human reason, that appears to me in this
matter to be preferably to be held, which is more consonant to
Holy Scripture and to the sayings of the saints ; and therefore,
without prejudice to any better opinion, and saving always the
reverence to the Mother of G-od, it seems to me, that it is to
be said, that she was conceived with original sin. But to this
8 L. 3. dist. 3. q. 1.
8 In 2 Sent. d. 30. q. 2. Art, i.
Writers on the Festivals of the B. F. 261
I am moved, first because Scripture, whenever it speaks of this,
pronounces universally of all without exception, and is under-
stood by all expositors universally of all who are born in the
way of nature ; from which it seemeth to follow, that to except
any one therefrom is to contradict sacred Scripture. This is
confirmed by the authority of S. Augustine (De Perf. Just. v.
fin., De Gratia Christi et Pecc. Orig.), S. Ambrose (on S. Luke
c. 39, ' Jesus Alone was throughout holy of those born of
women,' and on Isa. in S. Aug.), S. Aug. De Nupt. et Concup.,
Jul. L. v. c. on the contrast between the caro peccati and the
caro similis carni peccati, the sup. Gen. ; [Fulgentius,] de Eide
ad Petrum ; [Aug.] c. Julian, vi. 4, that else Christ did not die
for her."
He quotes also S. Anselm, Cur Deus Homo, and
answers the arguments of the Scotists.
Of such as wrote sermons on the Festivals of
the B.V., the following have heen quoted, as
stating that her sanctification was subsequent to
her Conception : —
127. Richard of S. Laurence, Cistercian, Peniten-
tiary at Rouen, A.D. 1230 :—
" * ' In the beginning God created,' &c., c In the beginning,'
i.e. of the restoration of man, ' God ' (Whose special work Mary
ia, whence the Psalm says to Him, ' Thou createdst the dawn,'
i. e. Mary, and, from her, the Sun of righteousness) ' created
the heaven and the earth,' i. e. the soul and body ; but this
* earth was empty and void,' before the grace of sauctification ;
' and darkness was upon the face of the deep,' i. e. she was con-
ceived in original sin, ' and God said,' as it were predestinating
her, 'let there be light, and there was light,' when He sanctified
her. — Dawn is the first brightness of the day. For she was
1 De Laud. V. M. L. vii. f. 466. in Turr. P. vi. c. 35, f. 125,
text corrected by Alva, 11. 22. p. 279.
262 Rich. ofS.Laur.; B. V. cleansed from or ig. sin.
the beginning of the day of grace, which day began from her
sanctification, She was partly obscure, partly lightsome;
obscure through original sin, as to the Nativity in the womb ;
lightsome through the Nativity from the womb by sanctifica-
tion."
" 2 Before we come to treat of the twelve special prerogatives
of the B.V., we must consider the dignities and privileges of
her virgin flesh. And first we must observe, that some derive
flesh [caro] from wanting [carendo], because manifold was that
glorious wanting or glorious defect in her flesh. The flesh of
Mary lacked original sin in her sanctification, whence ' the Most
High sanctified His tabernacle ' (Ps. xlvi.) when He cleansed
it from original sin, so that it should be born wholly pure. For
then the Father seemeth, as it were, to have said to the Holy
Spirit that of Proverbs (c. xxv.), ' Take away the rust from the
silver, and a most pure vessel shall come forth.' For then that
worker in gold, i. e. the Holy Spirit, Who is the artificer of all
(Wisd. vii.), took away from the silver of the Virgin's flesh the
whole rust of original fault, and then was the flesh itself silver,
tried by the fire of the Holy Spirit, purged of earth, i. e. from
earthly thought, and purged sevenfold, i. e. through sevenfold
grace ; and all this, that the vessel of the Virgin's body might
go forth most pure, to receive graces and virtues, and to become
a condign material, from which God the Father should prepare
a glorious Body for His Only Begotten Son."
128. fDe Bandelis alleged two passages from a
" Bishop of Lincoln," the one upon Boethius, the
other upon a Psalm, the reference to which he did
not fill up. " Episcopus Lincolniensis," " Dominus
Lincolniensis," or " Lincolniensis," are titles by
which Grosthead or " Grosteste" is commonly desig-
nated in MSS. 3, as well as by the fuller titles
2 Ib. L. iii. f. 175.
3 As in Cod. Lincoln. Ivi. cv. Merton. xlvii. 26. Or. xx.
1. 3. Univ. Ixii. 1. clx. 5. "reverendus Lincolniensis," Ball.
cccxx, 3. &c. Coxe, Cat. Codd. MSS. Coll. Oxon.
GrostJiead; B.V. cast off darkness of orig. sin. 263
" Robertas Lincolniensis," or with the use of his
surname. He was consecrated A.D. 1235. He had
been " a lecturer in the Schools of Theology," was
"a preacher among the people," and "in great
reputation for learning and holiness." His death
was that of a saint.
The sermon on the Psalm was doubtless one of
a collection of sermons which he says (in contradis-
tinction to those to the Clergy), " 4 1 delivered to
all generally, and first on the glorious Virgin, the
infallible pattern of all living." The passage is a
characteristic one, but expresses only what was said
by others also of his date : —
" 5 More than others did the B. V. shine in this life through
uprightness, from which, after the Conception of Jesus Christ,
she did not decline, even by venial sin. For after she cast
a-way the darkness of original sin, she was so clad with armour
of light, that in no part was she obscured by the cloud of
venial sin. But Christ never departed, because He had no
sin. But neither did the B. V., after the Conception of Christ,
ever go back by venial sin ; whereas the other saints sometimes
go back either by remitting the fervour of charity, or by sinning
venially."
4 " Finiunt hi sermones quos ad clerum solum proposui.
Incipiunt et alii sermones quos generaliter ad omnes protuli,"
&c. Mert. Ixxxii. n. 3.
5 " Super Psal. . . . circa principium " de B. p. G2. The
passage, said to be taken from a comment on Boethius de dua-
bus naturis et una Persona Christi, has nothing remarkable,
nor do I find any trace of such a work by him. It is, " Christ
took flesh from the Blessed Virgin, which from the primeval
transgression o'f our first pnrent was sinful."
264 Mary's "Concep. not celebrated" in Cent. XIII.
129. f Joannes de Rupella (de la Rochelle), Fran-
ciscan, a hearer of Alexander de Hales, c; c a reli-
gious and learned man." He " 7 wrote on the
Sentences, a Summa of virtues and vices, on the
soul." About A.D. 1242.
" 8 Mary, in the origin of her conception, had the bitterness
of original corruption ; but, while she was yet in her mother's
womb, was sweetened by the grace of sanctification, so as to be
born in the sweetness of sanctity."
130. Odo de Castro Rodulphi9, an ancient
Doctor. He was made Cardinal and Bishop of
Tusculum by Innocent IV., A.D. 1244.
" * A threefold Nativity is celebrated by the Church ; viz. of
John Baptist, the B. V., and the Saviour. — Neither the Con-
ception of the B. V. nor that of any other saint is celebrated,
but only that of the Saviour. For the B. V. drew with her
[in her conception2] both fault and punishment; yet she was
sanctified in her mother's womb ; but, when ? we know not.
But that she could afterwards sin venially, we believe; but
whether she sinned ? we know not. But in the Conception of
the Saviour, the Holy Spirit so overshadowed her, that there-
after she did not sin, nor could sin."
6 Wading, Ann. A.D. 1242, n. 2. p. 153. 7 Tritliein. c. 459.
8 In Serin. Nativ. Virg. in Turr. L. vi. c. 32. f. 123.
9 In the Toledo MS. he is called " Odo de Castro Eodulphi,
D.D. Chancellor of Paris, afterwards a Cistercian Abbot." De
Alva Ver. 228, pp. 638, 9.
1 I have translated from an extract of a Sermon on the
Nativity of the B. V. given by De Alva (Lux veritatis Ver. 230,
p. 642), from a Toledo and an Escurial MS.
2 Alva says that the words "in conceptione" are not in the
Escurial MS., and in the Toledo MS. are inserted by a much later
hand. I suppose that they were inserted to prevent the idea
of any later period than the Conception.
Clirist Alone did not contract sin. 265
131. fLucas of Padua, Franciscan, a companion
and disciple of S. Antony of Padua. Died A.D.
1245.
" 3 In his sermon on the Baptism of Christ, ' This is My
Beloved Son, in "Whom," &c., he says, that the Father commends
Christ on four grounds : 1st, from His Aloneness [singulari-
tas], when He says, ' This,' as being separate from others, to
Whom none is like. Aud specially in three things. First, in
the fulness of gifts. Secondly, in the immunity from sin, that
He neither did sin, nor contracted it. And, alleging Heb. vii.,
* separate from sinners,' he says He was ' separate, because His
flesh was taken from the sinful mass and cleansed.' "
132. fGulielmus Peraldus [Perault], some say
Abp. of Lyons, Dominican. S. Antoninus set him
first among the Dominican preachers, and says that
his " Summa 4 on virtues and vices was useful to
preachers." He is said to have died before 1250.
" 6 For the water of a fountain hath bitterness, when it went
forth from the sea, but before it is drawn, it loseth it; therefore
8 Turr. P. 6. c. 32. f. 123. He quotes also " a sermon on
the Nativity of the B. V.," "a star shall arise," in which, after
dividing the threefold beauty, he says thus : '« Her first beauty
was cleanness of original sin ; the second, virginal contiuency ;
the third, heavenly conversation." He quoted it, I doubt not,
because the subject being the Nativity, and the text, at " the
rising of the stars," corresponding to that nativity, the clean-
ness of original sin referred, according to the context, to her
cleanness at her birth, and that cleanness, being at her birth,
and not, as far as appears, previously, involved cleansing.
4 Summa Hist. tit. 23. c. 11. n. 2. T. iii. 682.
6 Serm. 4. de Nativ. B.V. sub them, "fons hortorum." Turr.
Par. 6. c. 29. f. 120. Alva could not find the sermon, n, 112.
p. 450.
266 Martin. Pol.; Cone, of B. V. in orig. sin; before
the water, when it is drawn, is sweet. So the Bl. V., going
forth from her parents, had in her conception the bitterness of
original sin, but when she was sanctified in the womb before
her Nativity she lost it, and received the sweetness of grace ;
therefore in her Nativity she was pleasing to God."
133. Martinus Polonus, Dominican, Penitentiary
of Nicolas III., consecrated Archbishop of Gnesen,
A.D. 1277, and died. He was author of the Chro-
nicle, of the Summa of the Canon law, called from
him Martiniana, &c.
" 6 The prophet shows that God disposed her birth, when he
says, ' The Lord shall send forth a rod ' (Is. xi.) ; for He sent
her forth in the birth of conception and in the birth of Nativity,
because God is shown to have promoted both. For He pro-
moted conception, as to nature ; nativity, as to grace. For
Jerome writes, that Anne her mother and Joachirn her father
were barren ; so that, despairing of offspring, they did not pro-
pose to come together any more. "Whence, when Joachim had
retired from Anne, he is bidden by the Angel to return. It is
intimated that a child should be born, God helping nature.
But God promoted too the birth of nativity by sanctification ;
for she was not born, according to the common law, with original
fault, but, sanctified in the womb, she was born with abundant
grace."
" Here then the true Bezaleel made an ark, i. e. the B. V.,
of sittim wood, which are like white thorn, incombustible, in-
corruptible, all which agrees with the Bl. Virgin. For she
8 Serm. 277. ed. Strasburg, 1484 (no pagiu.)- A note says,
" the author of this book says, ' Mary was a thorn on account
of original sin in her conception,' but the opposite is held now."
[1484]. Martin speaks of her being " sanctified most fully in
the Conception of the Son of God, because afterwards she is
believed not to have sinned even venially. Whence Aug. ' cum
de peccatis agitur,' " &c.
birth, cleansed; so Nativ. of B. V. only kept. 267
was a ' thorn ' on account of original sin in her conception ;
white, because of sanctification in the nativity ; incombustible,
on account of the extinction of the fomes ; incorruptible, on
account of the observance of virginity."
" 7 ' Take away rust from the silver, and a most pure vessel
shall go forth8.' In these words, as they may be adapted
to the B. V., two things are touched on ; the Conception of
the B. V. in sin, when he says, ' take away the rust from the
silver,' and her sanctification in the womb, when he says,
' a most pure vessel shall go forth.' "
Then, after speaking of the silver, as white through virginity
and purity, ductile through obedience, musical through the
words, " be it unto me according to thy word," he adds, " But
this silver was at one time sprinkled with the rust of original
sin, viz. in the conception, because she was conceived in original
sin, which, on account of the ancient waste of human nature,
is called ' rust.' Observe, her conception (as neither of other
saints, who all were conceived in original sin), is not celebrated,
except the Conception of Jesus Christ, which was without sin.
Showing then the consumption ° of original fault, setting, after
the way of the prophets, the present for the future, he says, 'take
away the rust from the silver,' and afterwards he hints at her
sanctification, when he says, 'and there shall go forth a most
pure vessel.' — He does not say pure or purer, but 'most pure,'
as a difference from other saints. For Jeremiah, on account of
the sanctification in his nativity, was a pure vessel ; but John
Baptist purer, but the B. V. purest ; not without reason, for
He was to dwell in her, "Who purifies others. Yet, since we
are not only conceived but are born also ' children of wrath,'
7 Serm. 278. The same annotator says, "In the sermon
immediately preceding, the author of this book says that Mary
was conceived in original sin, and her conception was not cele-
brated ; but now in the Church the opposite is preached and
celebrated."
8 De Alva, n. 214, found some corresponding words on the
same text in a Toledo MS. and hinted falsification.
9 Consutnptionem ; Turr. had " assumptionem."
268 Jac. de Vorag.; Mary conrfd. in orig. sin,
lo, the Church celebrates the nativity of no saint, unless he
was sanctified in the womb. "Whence, since the sanctificatiou
of the B. V. could not be proved by the text [of Scripture] as
that of Jeremiah and John Baptist, therefore her nativity was
not celebrated of old [then he gives the account of its being re-
vealed by angels] whence it was celebrated throughout the
world and rightly ; because, as Solomon had predicted, ' the rust
of sin having been taken away, this most pure vessel had gone
forth' in her nativity."
134. fConrad (Holzinger) of Saxony, Franciscan.
Turr. speaks of his ade salutat. Angelica " as a
"notable and most devout work." [A Conrad of
Saxony was murdered A. D. 1282, Wading Ann.]
" ' * Take away the rust from silver, and a most pure vessel will
go forth.' The most pure vessel was the B. V., who, when the
rust of original sin had been taken away through sanctificatiou
in the womb, came forth this day, holy and most pure. Ber-
nard. ' The mother of God was without all doubt holy before
she was born.' "
135. Jacobus de Voragine, General of the Domini-
cans, a Bishop of Genoa A. D. 1290. He is said
to have known almost all S. Augustine by heart 2,
Author of the " Golden Legend."
1 Serni. 2 on the Nativity of the B. V. from the Franciscan
Library at Basle. Turr. L. G. c. 32. f. 123. v. De Alva says
that the words "peccati originalis" were wanting in a MS. in
old characters in the Escurial, (n. 62. p. 384). But they must
have been intentionally omitted, 1) because there was no
other "rust" from which it could be held that the B. V. was
cleansed; 2) because the interpretation of this text of the
cleansing of the B. V. from original sin is known and familiar
in other writers.
2 Cave sub tit. A,D. 1290.
born without it, has middle place. 269
" 3 ' Who is this that cometh forth, &c. ?' They marvel at her,
in regard to her fourfold state. First, as to her birth, when
they say, 'arising like the dawn.' For she was then 'like the
dawn,' being purged from all darkness of sin and overstreamed
with the light of Divine grace. For all other saints are con-
ceived and born with original sin ; but Christ was conceived
without original sin and was born without original sin. But
the V. M. holds a middle place, because she was conceived with
original sin, and born without original sin.' "
And then with a mystical interpretation of
Job iii. : —
" This threefold difference is referred to in Job iii., when it
is said of the day of original fault, which began when the eyes
of Adam were opened, ' Let the stars be obtenebrated by its
darkness.' For the stars and the other saints were obtene-
brated by that day of original fault, because they were conceived
and born with original [fault]. ' Let it wait for the Light, i.e.
Christ, and see it not.' For that day of fault did not see
Christ, neither in His conception or birth nor the dawn of the
rising morn. It saw the morn, i. e. the Virgin as to her con-
ception, but it did not see her as to her rising."
" 4 She is called a star, because she had no corruption,
neither in birth, nor in life, nor in death. For in her Nativity
she had not the corruption of original [sin], and this is shown
by example, because this same is asserted of Jeremiah and John
Baptist, of whom one was a prophet of Christ, the other the
precursor of Christ ; much more is it believed of her who was
the mother of Christ."
" 5 This house was in light ; for, as it is said (Cant, vi.), ' the
3 De Ass. B. M. V. Serm. 4. Alph. xvi. p. 123. Augusts,
1482.
4 Nativ. Serm. 3. Strasb. 1484. Serm. 2. p. 140, Augusta?,
1484.
5 De Nat. Serm. 2. Strasb. 1484. and ed. sine loc. et ann.
f. 155.
270 Mary conceived in orig. sin, born without it,
light of the dawn shone in her ' when the Holy Spirit sanctified
her, because then He took away and removed from her the
darkness of original sin."
" ° ' Thou art ever with me.* For Christ was ever with the
Virgin, in her threefold state, viz. when she was in her mother's
womb, when she was living in the world, and when she de-
parted from the world. For when she was in her mother's
womb, He sanctified her ; while she was living in the world, He
preserved her from all sin ; when she departed from the world,
He made her wholly glorious and luminous. First then ' He
sanctified her.' For there are three conceptions and nativities;
one, whereby one is conceived without sin, and born without
sin ; and in this way no one was conceived and born without
sin, except Christ Alone. Another, whereby one is conceived
with sin and is born with sin ; and this is our conception and
our nativity, because we are conceived with sin and are born
with sin. For there is a middle way, whereby one is conceived
with sin and is born without sin, and, according to Bernard,
such was the Conception and Nativity of the B. V. For she
was (as he asserts in his Epistle to the Canons of Lyons) con-
ceived in original sin and born without sin, because she was
sanctified by the Holy Spirit and cleansed from all sin ; and
therefore, according to Bernard, ' she was holy, earlier than she
was born.' This threefold difference is touched upon, Job iii.,
where he speaks of the night of original fault, saying, ' Let the
day perish on which I was born, and the night in which it was
said, a man-child was conceived,' and afterwards, ' Let the stars
be obtenebrated by its darkness, let it wait for the light and
not see it, nor the dawn of the rising morn.' In that he here
names light, dawn, and stars ; by the sun, Christ is meant ; by the
dawn, the Virgin Mary; by the stars, the other saints. The night
therefore of original fault did not see Christ, either as to the
Conception, or His Birth ; therefore it is said, f Let it wait for
the Light and not see it.' ' The dawn,' i. e. the B. V., it saw
6 Serm. on Job iii., on Sat. before 3rd Sunday in Lent, re-
ferred to by Turrecremata, c. 29. p. 119, given by Alva, n. 140 ;
not in ed. Paris, 1533.
her middle place between Christ and others. 271
as to the Conception, but not as to the rising. Therefore it is
said, ' nor the dawn of the rising morn.' But the stars, i. e.
holy men, that same night of original concupiscence saw, both
in conception and the birth, and therefore they were wholly
obtenebrated, and have both a tenebrous conception and a
tenebrous birth ; and therefore it is said, ' Let the stars be ob-
tenebrated by its darkness.' "
136. Thomas de Ales, English Franciscan,
" Doctor of the Sorbonne, whose piety and learning
gained him a great name, remarkably erudite in
human and Divine philosophy, a most acute dis-
putant in the schools, a most celebrated preacher
of the Divine Word among the people, and on
these grounds well known throughout, not England
only, but France and Italy 6."
" 7 In his devout treatise on the life of the blessed and glorious
Ever-Virgin Mother of God, Mary, in c. 5, on the Cone, of the
B.Y., where, having related the history of her conception, he
adduced in proof that saying of Aug., 10 sup. Gren. ad lit., ' But
since there is in the seed both a visible corpulence and an in-
visible mode (ratio) both continued from Abraham or even
from Adam himself to the body of Mary, because she also was
conceived and had her origin in the same way.' Then, in c. 12,
on the sanctification of the same sacred Virgin, he adduces
Bernard (Ep. ad Lugd.) and Anselm, saying that she was of
those who, before the Nativity of her Son, J. C., by believing
His true death, were cleansed from sin, &c."
137. Jacobus, or Jacoponus de Benedictis, Fran-
ciscan, died A.D. 1306, author of seven books of
Italian hymns, of the " Cur mundus militat sub
vana gloria V1 and (some thought) of the " Stabat
Mater ;" although this is now said to be older.
6 Wadding, Scriptt. Ord. Min. 12, 220.
7 Turr. vi. 30, p. 122.
272 Jacoponi ; B. V. alone cleansed from orig. sin.
" 8 O virgin, more than woman, | Holy Virgin Mary, | More
than woman, I say, | By Scripture I explain ; | While enclosed
in the womb, | Soon was the soul infused into thee ; | Virtuous
power has sanctified thee ; | Divine union | Sanctified thee; |
from all contagion, | Thou remainedst undefiled ; | Original
sin, | "Which Adam sowed, | Every man is born with this. |
Thou wert cleansed therefrom | No mortal sin | Assailed thy
will; | And from the venial | Thou alone art immaculate."
138. James of Lausanne, Dominican Provincial
in France, A.D. 1318, died 1321 ; " 9 a man of vast
knowledge, and vast literature, and especially in
Holy Scripture ;" " T of distinguished knowledge in
things human and Divine."
" 2 The B. V. was born wholly holy, and without all vileness
of sin ; and this is what ' rises ' imports. For therefore is she
said to be born or generate, as though it meant to begin to be
without corruption, as sun and stars rise. Therefore the B. V.
is honourable, being sanctified. But this was wonderful, when
she was born without sin. For to make a new vessel of putrid
matter is a great thing. For human nature, from which the
body of the B. V. was formed, was all corrupt ; and how, then,
could she be born without sin ? See an instance. When a
lily is generated within the earth and conceived, it is in vile-
8 Odi iii. 6. His editor would have it, that Jacopone used
" mondata," " cleansed," for " monda," " clean." But, besides
the difficulty of supposing that Jacopone would purposely use
a word, which in its natural sense would contradict his belief,
had he believed in the Imm. Cone., it would then only declare
that she was free from it, not that she had been free from it
in her conception. Jacopone reserves the word " immaculate "
for exemption from every stain even of venial sin.
9 Leander, f. 120 v. in Quetif, i. 548.
1 Sixt. Sen. ib. Trithemius, c. 659.
2 Serm. 2, on the Nativ. of B. V. in Toledo Library. Alva,
n. 135, pp. 486, 487.
B. V. in orig. sin, when animated; soon cleansd. 273
ness and mire ; but when it is elevated and hath gone forth
from the earth, it is all white and without spot. The reason
whereof is, that the virtue of heaven, whereby it is formed,
separates pure from impure. For it parts with the impure in
the earth, and what is pure it maketh to go forth from the
earth, and therefore the lily is born beautiful, although vile and
foul while conceived. The B. V. calls herself a lily. ' I am a
flower of the field, a lily of the valleys ' (in the Canticles), i. e.
a lily which yields a sweet odour, because the lily of her vir-
ginity was planted into two valleys, viz. of heart and body ; and
so, as the lily is conceived in uncleanness, so the B. V. in her
mother's womb was conceived in the uncleanness of original
sin, when soon after, by the virtue of the Holy Spirit, she was
whitened and cleansed, according to which she was born alto-
gether holy."
" 3 It is committed to the Holy Spirit by the whole Trinity,
Who is the Author of all purity and holiness, to purify and
cleanse the B. V., when He says, ' Take away the rust from the
silver.' In evidence whereof, he says, that it is to be noted
that the B.V. contracted the rust of the original sin in her
conception and animation, which original fault is well described
after the manner of rust." And below, " None of women escaped
this rust, and no man save Christ, according to Eccl. vii."
139. Card. Bertrand de Turre, Doctor famosus,
A.D 1316, also a Franciscan: lived to 1343, "a
grave author, wrote very many sermons V
« B rpne £rsj. |)eginniDg Of those ways, i. e. of the works, was
3 In a sermon on the Nativ. of B. V. in Turr., Par. 5, c. i.
f. 82 [misprinted 84] v.
4 Alva, 1. c.
5 Serm. de Nat. B. V. on Prov. 8, in Turr. P. 6, c. 30. f. 122,
allowed by De Alva, Yer. 42, p. 337. Turr. also quoted from
his expos, of the Gospels on that " the power of the Highest."
"According to the gloss, it shall cool against the heat of the
fomes, and according to Gregory (Moral. 33), the flesh of
S H-
274 Early in XlVth cent, common opinion
a holy work, which God Himself made, in the first person
belonging to the New Testament, which was the B. V. And
that first work, according to him, was the Conception of the
Virgin herself; not indeed the first, which was in the trans-
fusion of the seeds ; nor the second Conception of the Virgin,
which was in the infusion of her soul in the already organized
body, which was with the contraction of original fault, when her
soul was infused into her body; but the third Conception,
which was in the infusion of grace, through her sanctification
and cleansing from original sin."
140. Jordanes de Quedlinborch (by some called
John of Saxony) A.D. 1325, an Augustinian, a
Reader of Theology at Magdeburg, and a celebrated
writer : —
" 6 It is to be observed that the Conception of the B. Virgin
was fourfold. The first, the eternal, of which it is said, Prov. viii.,
' Not as yet was the abyss when I was conceived.' But this
does not bear on the present question. The three others were
in time; seminis, hominis, flaminis. In the first of these
neither was fault contracted nor grace infused, because it was
an inanimate mass, but the soul alone is capable of fault and
grace. In the second, viz. in the infusion of the soul, original
sin is contracted. For although in that mass there is no
fault (as was said), nor is the soul in itself stained, because it
Mary was overshadowed by the power of the Most Highest,
because in her womb incorporeal Light took a body, from which
obumbration she received in herself all refrigeration of flesh
and mind " (P. 5, c. 2. f. 83 v.). And on the Ave Maria : " For
she was exempted in birth from the woe of infection ; because
she was singularly sanctified ; and in the second sanctification,
when she conceived the Son of God, there came into her such
abundance of grace, that it not only restrained in her the fomes
of sin, but totally rent it from her" (Serm. on the Annunc.).
6 Serm. i. in Cone. B. V. Turr. P. 6. c. 33. f. 124. De
Alva, Ver. 198, p. 585.
that B. V. contracted original sin. 275
is created pure and immaculate, there is yet in that mass a
morbid infection, on account of which, so soon as the soul is
infused, it contracts original sin. To take a familiar instance,
in lime, which being formally hot, of water, which ia in itself
cold, heat results therein, on account of the heat fore-existing
in the lime. So here. In the third Conception, habitual
grace is infused, viz. when any one is sanctified in the womb.
To this Conception of the Virgin ought the intention of one
who celebrates this Feast to be referred ; not to the first, which
was foul ; nor to the second, because in it she contracted ori-
ginal sin, according to the holy Doctors ; although some essay
to deny this, out of devotion to the Yirgin. Whence, if in
that Conception she contracted original sin, yet immediately,
and if perhaps not on the instant, on account of the repugnance,
since that suddenness is impossible by nature, she was cleansed
or sanctified," &c.
"7By epicycle understand sin, whereby we are subjected
to retrogradation from our heavenly country ; but Christ Alone
was without sin, and if we be urged as to the B. V., it is to be
said that she was not without original sin, at least for a very
brief moment, according to the common opinion."
141. S. Vincent Ferrier, A.D. 1414. S. Anto-
ninus gives a sermon of his as a specimen8 of the
way in which the Conception should be preached
upon, " avoiding all censure of the opposite party,
because it was a matter which occasioned scandal
among the people, since, owl-like, they cannot bear
such a ray of truth, and it would carry away no
7 Post, prima Domin. Adventus f. 1. col. 2. in De Alva.
Turrecr. quotes it, " But if it be urged as to the B. V. that
she never deviated from right in either way, it is to be said that
she was not without original sin, at least for a very short
moment, according to the more common opinion of all
Doctors." Ib.
8 Summa Tit. 8 c. 2. fin.
S 2
276 S. Vincent Ferrier ; the B. V.
fruit." In that sermon S. Vincent explained9
the words " divided the light from the darkness,"
"swiftly purifying that soul from original sin," He
puts down the three purifications : —
" J First, when the boy is going forth of his mother's womb ;
and this was Jeremiah's, according to that, ' before thou
wentest forth from the womb (i.e. fully), I sanctified thee.' The
second is when the child is still wholly in the womb ; as John
Baptist, who was sanctified in the sixth month, when the Virgin
Mary, having conceived the Son of God, saluted Elizabeth.
The third is as it were in a moment, after the creation and
infusion of the soul ; for the body of the Virgin having been
formed, being conceived of Anna and Joachim, not of the Holy
Ghost (for to say this were heretical, for Christ Alone had
this), the soul of the Virgin having been created and infused
by God, she was suddenly sanctified on the same day, accord-
ing to that, ' the Most High sanctified His tabernacle.' "
The festival of the Conception was still, at the
beginning of the 15th century, infrequent. For S.
Vincent says, " And some make a festival of this."
He says the like, in another sermon on the Con-
ception of the B. V.
" 2 Of no saints is the feast of the Conception held, except
of Christ and the Virgin Mary. But of the Virgin on three
grounds; 1) because she was worthily impetrated; 2) be-
cause she was sanctified loftily ; 3) because she was preserved
firmly. In the second observe six modes of sanctification ;
9 Summa Tit. 8, c. 3. col. 557.
1 Ib. col. 558.
2 Serm. de Sanctt. pp. 19—21, Antw. 1573. De B. refers
also to a Sermon on S. Anne, " the body having been formed
and the spirit created by God, on the same day and hour she
was sanctified. — Ib. p. 283, and on the Nativity of the B. V.
p. 359.
sanctified, after infusion of the soul. 277
three before nativity, aud three after nativity. The fourth in
the mother's womb, as Jeremiah. The fifth is greater, and is
only read of S. John Baptist, because he was sanctified three
months before his nativity. The sixth, and above all these, is
the sauctification of the V. M., because, not when she was to
be born, nor in the last day, or week, or month, but in the
same day and hour when her body had been formed, and her
soul created (for then she was rational and capable of sauctifi-
cation), she was sanctified. When the body of the glorious
Virgin was organized and lineated, and the soul joined to her
body by creation, then the Most High sanctified His taber-
nacle. You know, how when a church has been builded, but
not before, the Bishop enters to consecrate. So of the Virgin
Mary, the body having been organized and the soul infused,
the Bishop, i. e. the Holy Spirit came, Who sanctified her."
Of commentators of the same period there have
been quoted, —
142. f John de Varsiaco (of Varsy near Auxerre)
" 3 a Magister in Paris and a preacher celebrated
for learning and eloquence, about 1270."
" 4 He commented on many books of the Bible ; and in his
exposition of the Canticles °, treating on that, ' Who is this,
that cometh forth like the rising dawn ? ' says, ' The rising
dawn.' In the Nativity, the dawn is cold and humid. So the
Bl. V., illustrious from the nobility of her race, whence it is
sung of her, ' Clara ex stirpe David,' was cold through the
repression of the ' fomes,' or its extirpation according to others ;
Luke i. : l The virtue of the Highest shall overshadow thee.' "
3 Quetifi. 373.
4 Turr. P. 6. c. 29, f. 12. v. quoting his Postilla on Cant.
5 Quetif, after speaking of his Postills on Wisdom and
Canticles in a Basle MS., says, " Hence you may easily refute
P. P. De Alva, who (Sol verit. Ead. 255, Col. 1616) endeavours
with all his might to prove that this our John is a fictitious
person, and that there are no writings of his" (i. 373).
278 Hugo de S. Caro, Expos, of EccL vii. 27, 28.
143. Hugo de S. Caro, Cardinal, A.D. 1245,
celebrated for his comments on Holy Scripture,
and employed by Gregory IX. to bring about tbe
union with the Greeks, draws out what has, for
very many years, seemed to me the deepest mean-
ing of Ecclesiastes vii. 27, 28. " This have I found,
saith the preacher, counting one by one, to find out
the account : which yet my soul seeketh, but I find
not : one man among a thousand have I found ; but
a woman among those have I not found."
" 6 Mystically this is explained of Christ, Who Alone is ex-
ternal to that universality, of which it is said, ' TA11 have sinned,
and need the glory of God,' and ' 8 In many things we all
offend.' Whence, in the Psalm, ' ° There is none that doeth
good, there is not, up to One,' i. e. Christ, Who did no sin
whatever, nor had any. ' But a woman have I not found/ who
had not something of womanly fault, at least by origin [origin-
aliter]. Even the Blessed Virgin had original sin, wherefore
6 ad loc. Opp. T. iii. p. 92.
7 Bom; iii. 23.
8 St. James iii. 2.
9 Psalm xiv. 2. 4 ; liii. 2. 4. Turrecremata quotes fGaricus,
a Paris Doctor, as saying the same thing on Eccl. ad loc. "'A
woman of all, have I not found,' because none was without
original sin" (in De Alva n. 84, p. 413). Turr. P. G, c. 29,
f. 120, v. And fJames of Lausanne, a Parisian Doctor,
Dominican, "Among all men he found One only altogether
clean from all concupiscence, viz. Christ, but among women
none, because the B. Y. was stained with original sin." Turr.
P. 5, c. 1, f. 84, v. ; P. 6, c. 29, f. 119, v.
S. Antoninus quotes Joannes Dominici, whose disciple he
was, " That Man was Christ ; but the number, a thousand, is
put, after the manner of Scripture, a determined for an inde-
termined number, i.e. for the whole company of the saints,
Nicolas de Lyra. 279
her Conception is not celebrated ; yet they who celebrate it,
ought to have respect to her sanctification, whereby she was
sanctified in her mother's womb."
" * ' And the virtue of the Highest ' i.e. the Holy Spirit or the
grace of the Holy Spirit 'shall overshadow thee,' i.e. shall
refrigerate thee by extinguishing the ' fomes.' Whence the gloss,
* The Spirit supervening into the Virgin shall both cleanse her
mind from the defilement of vices.' And observe that ' from
the defilement of vices,' can be intransitive, i. e. from vices
which are defilement, or transitive, that the meaning should be
from the defilement, i. e. from the fomes of vices, whence the
Interlinear says, 'against all incentives of vices.' "
He believed that the " fomes " was extinguished
at the Conception of our Lord.
144. William of Alton, an Englishman, but a
Paris Doctor, about A.D. 1265, explains Ecclesiastes
vii. 27, 28 in the same way.
" ' ' I have found a man of a thousand,' i. e. Christ, in Whom
this concupiscence was not, because He had neither original
sin [originale], nor inclination to actual sin [actuale]. 'A woman
of all have I not found,' viz. in whom there was not original
sin."
145. Nicolas de Lyra, Franciscan, Parisian
Doctor, Author of the great Commentary on the
Bible, which he began in 1292, finished A.D. 1330,
still spoke of the belief of "the cleansing from
original sin " as the " more common."
among whom Christ Alone was found without any sin, not any
woman." "So," he says, "explains Joannes Dominici on
Ecclesiastes, where also he proves the proposition by many
originals of ancient saints and by reasons." Summa, P. 1. Tit.
8, c. 2.
1 On S. Luke i.
2 Quetif i. 245, 6.
280 De Lyra; belief in her cleansing, the commoner.
" Well did he say, c shall supervene upon thee,' because the
Holy Ghost had before come upon the Virgin when yet in her
mother's womb, cleansing her from original sin, as is more
commonly said 3. But in the Conception of the Son of God,
the Holy Ghost ' supervened,' i. e. ' came again' to confer on
her greater fulness of grace, which consecrated not the mind
only but the belly, or, according to some [or (by another
reading, probably a correction,) " others "], by preserving her
from original sin."
At the close of his Preface to the Gospels, in
explaining as to the four Evangelists the symbols of
the Cherubim in Ezekiel's vision, he speaks abso-
lutely of our Lord, as being Alone Innocent, and
that, as not being, like all others, derived from the
root of sin.
" He says, ' before the face of a man,' because, before the
consideration of the Evangelist Matthew, as his special object,
was placed the likeness of Another Man, i.e. Christ, Whose
Humanity he chiefly considers. And Christ is well called
* Another Man,' because He was ' other ' than all other men
for all others proceeded from a root of sin. He Alone was
Innocent, through "Whom others were brought back to righte-
ousness, according to which it is written to the Romans, ' For
as through the disobedience of one,' &c."
3 Sucli was the original printed text in the editio priuceps
of Borne, 1471, 2 ; Venice, 1482 and 1491 ; Nuremberg, 1493 ;
one sine loco et anno ; also in the MSS. Mert. 1G5, Oriel 45,
Madg. 42 (all of the XlVth century), New Coll. 12, beg. of
the XVth cent. Turrecremata also quotes it so on the
Decretals. In the edition of Antwerp, 1617, the word " com-
munius " was changed into " communiter," and the words " ut
communiter etiam dicitur " were interpolated to express the
then state of opinion. " Alios " was also probably substituted
for "aliquos."
All, save Christ , incurred original sin. 281
And on the Thessalonians he answers the ex-
position of some who thought that S. Paul meant,
that those who should he found alive at the Coming
of Christ would meet Him without dying.
" 4 This exposition first fails herein, that it says that some
pass without death to immortality, whereas all, who descend
from Adam, except Christ5, incurred original sin, whose penalty
is death, and therefore all will pay the debt of death."
146. Ludolf of Saxony, Author of the " Life of
Christ," Dominican A.D.1300, Carthusian 1338. His
work has heen probably one of the most popular
for above 500 years, as appears from the multi-
tude of the MSS. and editions, and from the early
translations 6.
4 On 1 Thess. iv. 15, § 6, p. 653, 4, ed. Antwerp, 1634, first
by Douay Theologians, and then " ex iterata recensione " by D.
Leander de S. Martino, Benedictine.
5 De Alva (n. 226, p. 637) mentions editions in which ifc
stands "prater Christum et mafrem cjus ;" but this is doubtless
an interpolation, such as we have had other instances of.
The critical edition of 1634 rightly omitted them. The words
are not in the XlVth cent. MSS, Oriel 45, Mert. 165, or in
New Coll. 18, or in the Bodl. edition, s. 1. et a. The instance
which De Alva adduces from De Lyra on 3 Esdr. iv. 37,
" Wicked are kings, wicked are women, wicked are all the sons
of men, and wicked are all their works, and there is no truth
in them," relates to actual sin. De Lyra distinguishes greater
and lesser sins. " Por many kings, women, and men have
done iniquities, taking iniquity for enormous crime ; and so it is
a hyperbole, as they say 'All from the city went to such a
spectacle,' i.e. many ; but if ' iniquity ' be taken for any sin, all
nre called generally 'iniqui,' except Christ and the B. V., of
whom Zorobabel did not speak."
6 Fabr, mentions 7 editions in the 15th century (in addition
282 Ludolf of Saxony, author of Life of Christ.
" 7 But she [Mary] was cleansed by some singular privilege
from original [sin] in her mother's womb," quoting S. Ber-
nard [Ep. 174, n. 5] and, as from S. Augustine, " The B. V.
was sanctified before the Conception of the Son of God, so
that she could sin venially ; but after the Conception of the
Son of God, she could sin neither mortally nor venially."
The writer of notes on the edition of Paris,
1509, thought it necessary to correct this, saying,
" 8 Mary is asserted [viz. by Ludolf] to have been
purged, but rather preserved, from original sin."
He states the universality of original sin, in all
born after the way of nature, on the 51st Psalm : —
" 9 ' For lo ! I was conceived in iniquities,' i. e. in original
sin, 'and in sins did my mother conceive me,' i.e. in the con-
cupiscence of passion ; as though he would say, ' My mother
conceived me with the delectation of passion ; I, being con-
ceived, brought with me the iniquity of original sin, from
which I suffer difficulty to good and proneness to evil, on which
ground the sin of man is more remissible, and so there is
ground that Thou shouldest hear me, seeking Thy mercy.' Lo,
a naked and humble confession ! He is reproved as to one,
and he confesses all, not only actual but original also."
147. fPetrus de Palma [Baume] was appointed
to read on the Sentences at Paris in 1322, in a
general chapter at Florence, A.D. 1321 '.
to the ancient editions without place and year), 21 editions in
the 16th, 3 in the 17th ; also an Italian translation and two
French. There was also a Dutch transl, Antwerp, 1487.
7 c. 2.
8 f. iv. v., not in the edition of Strasb. 1474 or of 1483.
9 On Ps. 50 f. k. 2. ed. Spire, 1491 f.
1 Quetifi. 615.
The B. V. cleansed from original sin. 283
" 2 He it is Who by the Holy Ghost extinguished what
remained over [superfluitas] of the fomes in His Mother ;
whence Bede said this in the gloss : ' The Holy Spirit super-
vening into the Virgin, purified her mind from all defilement
of vices.' "
148. " Stephen, an ancient Postillator and Doctor
of Paris,"—
" 3 On Horn, vii., in regard to the fourth doubt which he
raises, viz., ' how original sin is remitted by Baptism,' he says
thus : ' But the corruption of soul is called original sin, which is
remitted in Baptism, not because corruption or that fomes
remains in soul or flesh ; but it is said to be remitted, on two
grounds, because Grod effaces it, as relates to fault, and because
that fomes is mitigated. For it does not so reign after Bap-
tism, but is gradually diminished, but is never altogether
destroyed, except by miracle, as we believe to have been done
in the glorious Virgin Mary,' and below, ' But the union of
the soul could not take place without sin, save in Christ alone.'
And he is of the same mind on Heb. vii. on the subject of
paying tithes."
149. A venerable father of the Cistercian order,
Englishman, of Fountain Abbey.
" 4 The Bl. V. Mary is compared to the moon by reason of
the beauty which it hath from the irradiation of the sun. For
2 Postilla on S. Luke i. Turr. P. 6, c. 29. f. 120.
8 Turr. P. 6, c. 35, f. 125 v.
4 In his Tripartite on the Canticles, which begins " Tres
sunt qui dant testimonium in ccelo." Turr. P. 6. c. 35, f. 125.
De Alva could not identify it. The exposition which he men-
tions of Thomas Cisterciens. is divided differently (as he says)
into ten (not three) parts, begins differently (" Osculetur me
osculo oris sui, quae vox sinagogae est"), and the passage which
he cites from it is wholly unlike (n. 133, pp. 482, 483), so that
the one could not be a corruption of the other.
284 S. Antoninus;
the Virgin Mary had a threefold degree of beauty from the Sun
of righteousness. For she was beautiful in her ingress, like
the new moon, by the gift of the grace of sanctificatiou, which
cleansed her from the original stain. More beautiful in pro-
gress, through the gift of the grace of fecundity which purged
her from the fomes of the flesh. But most beautiful was she
in her egress, as it were conjoined to the sun through the gift
of elevating grace, whence she was not only freed from the
original stain, but also from all punishment and temporal
misery."
I will close this list with an eminent Saint of the
15th century, who survived the Council of Basle,
and perhaps saw in the decision of that Council,
after the withdrawal of the legates of Eugenius, an
earnest that the Western Church would thereafter
decide in the way contrary to his own convictions.
150. S. Antoninus, Abp. of Florence, A. D.
1446 :-
"If the Scriptures and the sayings of ancient and modern
Doctors who were most devoted to the glorious Virgin are well
considered, it is manifestly plain from their words that she was
conceived in original sin. But they who hold the contrary
opinion, twist their sayings contrary to the intention of the
speakers," 1. c.
He gives at great length the authorities against
the Immaculate Conception, and answers the argu-
ments of Scotus in its behalf, going out of his way,
as he seems to say5, on occasion of the disputes on
5 " Since mention has been made of original sin, be there
here set down a matter or question, on which curious persons
daily and fruitlessly dispute, viz. of the Conception of the
glorious Virgin, setting down those things which doctors, both
lengthened discussion against 1mm. Cone. 285
the other side. The authorities are much the same
as have been quoted already; but he takes occa-
sion to speak of them, as having " been approved
by the Church G." Of S. Anselm he says, that he
cannot be explained away. Of S. Bernard, "who
wrote more devoutly and fully of the Virgin than
the rest." He separates the later doctors, of whom
he says, that "the chief (potissimi) say the same,
declaring the matter more in detail," notices that
Divines, of all orders, agreed herein, giving
large extracts from Peter de Tarantasia, Domi-
nican, afterwards Pope, viz. Innocent V., with
whom agreed Hervseus [Natalis], Henry of Ghent,
Durandus, Durandellus, and other " doctores so-
lennes " of the Dominicans. He also quotes S.
Bonaventura at large. "Many also of the most
excellent order of the Franciscans say the same,
and especially the most devoted above all, Bona-
ventura, afterwards Cardinal, and other 'solennes
doctores ' of the Franciscans, Richard de Media
ancient and modern, have thought thereon, leaving the deter-
mination to holy Church. For although it is not determined
by the Church, that the Virgin was conceived in original sin,
or not ; on which ground each may hold either opinion which
pleases him, without prejudice to salvation, yet if the Scrip-
tures," &c. (as in the text).
6 " The holy doctors, also, and they whose doctrines have
been approved by the Church, say this clearly, quoting S.
Augustine, S. Gregory, S. Leo, S. Ambrose, S. Hilary, &c."
" S. Thomas, whose doctrines also have been approved by the
Church."
286 S. Antoninus ; detailed answer
Villa, Alexander de Ales, Rigal., and Bernard, in
sermons on the Prophets, in the Serm. 4 Egredietur
Virga,'&c." He subjoins "JEgidius, a most excellent
Doctor of the Eremites, Guido of the Carmelites,
and John de Policratis."
Having given the arguments on the other side
from Scotus, and their answers to the arguments
against the Immaculate Conception, he says, —
"But all these are easily answered, clearly, not in a forced
way. 1) To that of the Canticles, 'Thou art all fair, and
there is no spot in thee,' — this is understood properly of the
Church, but only as transferred (transsuintive) of the Virgin,
after she had been sanctified ; whence it is sung in her Assump-
tion. So Durandellus. 2) Of S. Augustine's words, ' of whom,
in the question as to sin, I wish to make no mention for the
honour of the Lord,' it is said, according to Thomas and
Durandus, that Augustine there speaks of actual sin, as is
evident from the context before and after, and from the autho-
rity of 1 John i., which Augustine subjoins immediately, 'If
we say that we have no sin.' But in this all Doctors agree,
that the Virgin alone of adults was free from venial sins.
3) To the argument from S. Anselm about the purity of the
B. V., after giving the answer of John of Naples, he subjoins
his own, ' Or better ; as it may equally be said, that the air
is more lightful [than other], whether it was before dark or no
(for the air which hath more of light, is more lightful, although
it at some time was dark), so in this case, since spiritual purity
arises from the absence of the impurity of fault, which purity
the light of the grace of God causeth, it ought to be said
of the Virgin, who had more of the light of grace than any other
pure creature whatsoever, that she shone with greater purity
than any creature whatsoever, granted that she was at one
time subject to original fault."
In answer to the answers of the Scotists, that
to Scotist arguments for Imm. Cone. 287
the words " all sinned in Adam " are said gene-
rally; but that the contrary is said specifically of
the B. Y. ; and also, that whenever the soul of
Christ is spoken of alone, the soul of the Virgin is
also understood. He says, —
" The first answer does not avail, viz. that the doctors speak
in common, and according to the common course, not intending
to say that of the Virgin ; for he who says ' the whole ' ex-
cludes nothing, and he who says ' every one ' excludes no one,
and he who says ' no one,' excepts every one ; but in the afore-
said authorities it is said, not indefinitely, but universally, that
every one propagated from Adam universally incurs original
sin. Then, the saints intend to except no one, not even the
Virgin Mary, since moreover she herself is expressly men-
tioned in some authorities here and elsewhere. But the philo-
sophers and saints, speaking of any matter in common, treat
that matter, commonly speaking, indefinitely and not uni-
versally, if what they say on that matter in common, have an
exception in some special person.
" But as to what is said, that it is understood of Christ only
and His mother, there is no constraining ground for this ; nay,
many express authorities exclude Christ from original sin, and
include His mother. For neither is the union between Christ
and His mother such as between the Divine Persons, that, as
we say that, when any thing is said of One Person, appertaining
to the Substance, even when said exclusively, it is to be under-
stood of Another also, (as when Christ says, * No one knoweth
the Father, save the Son,' &c., the Holy Grhost is not excluded),
so, it should need be, that what is «said of Christ, should be
said of the Virgin, inasmuch as the Son, even as Man, was,
beyond comparison, of greater sanctity."
The answers as to S. Bernard he treats as
expedients to escape what could not be explained
away : —
" To that of Bernard, since it cannot be glossed, some simple
288 Card, de Turrecremata
persons say, that in a yision he appeared with a spot on his
breast, or that he retracted."
In regard to the visions of some mulierculse, he
says, —
" If it is said that some saints had a revelation of this sort,
as S. Brigit, it should be known that other saints, illustrious
for miracles, as S. Catherine of Sienna, had a revelation of the
contrary ; and since even true prophets sometimes think that
they have some things from revelation of the Holy Ghost,
which they say of themselves, it hath no inconvenience to say
that such revelations were not from God, but were human
dreams. An instance is in Nathan the prophet speaking to
David [2 Sam. vii.], who believed that he answered David out
of the spirit of prophecy ; and yet it was not so, as the event
showed."
He sums up, —
" In conclusion as to this matter, a man ought so to cleave
to one of these opinions, or rather to the first, that the B. V.
was conceived in original sin, for the reason aforesaid, as to be
prepared to hold the contrary, if the Church should determine
the contrary, and before such determination should not judge
any heretical, or impious, or wicked, who holdeth the other, and
should abstain from preaching this matter before the people,
with gainsaying of the opposite, &c."
Such is the evidence, for the most part col-
lected with great diligence, before the discovery of
printing, from the MSS. in different parts of
Europe by John de Turrecremata, when Master of
the Palace at Eome, being sent by Pope Eugenius
to the Council of Basle. He was much employed
by successive Popes, was made Cardinal by Euge-
nius, received the high titles of "Defender and
held B. V. to have been conceived in orig. sin. 289
Protector of the Faith " from Pius II. Of course
he did not receive those titles for that work, but
the work was no hindrance to his receiving them.
He relates that he was commissioned to write
for the Council of Basle, but was prevented from
presenting what he had written by the with-
drawal of those who held with Eugenius IV. from
the Council 7.
In his work on the Decretals he gives the
grounds on both sides : first, he supports the
arguments against the Immaculate Conception
elaborately by the texts of Scripture commonly
alleged, and by authorities of the Fathers who so
expounded them. He then states that each opinion
was held, but that " the way of speaking, that the
Blessed Virgin was included in original sin, seems
to some to be that which ought to be embraced
by all, on account of the three grounds given by
Cardinal Bonaventura, who for his excellence and
devotion is called the ' Seraphic Doctor.' ' " True
indeed is what this most illustrious Doctor says,
that this is the more common opinion among the
more learned, who have been of greatest reputation
in Theology. This will be most clear, if any wish
to examine the sayings of the most excellent Doctors,
whether those who wrote on the Sentences or ex-
pounded Holy Scripture; he will find that, as it
were, all so hold." Then, after having speci-
7 On the Decret. de Consecr. c. 4, cap. Firmissime.
T
290 Turr's book, why not presented to C. of Basle.
fied some, beginning with Peter Lombard, he
adds,
" And many others, whom I have collected to the number of
a hundred, hold the same opinion, whose sentences and pas-
sages I noted in the book which I wrote ' on the truth of the
Conception8,' being appointed at Basle, when the sacred
Council was celebrated there, to make relation on the affirma-
tive side, which was committed to me by the fathers of the
Council ; which relation, although I offered myself as prepared
to make it in the public Congregation, as a public instrument
made to this effect, was hindered, because certain, at the
instigation of the devil, the father of schism and discord,
attempting in the same Council divers scandals, the Presidents
of Pope Eugenius of holy memory departing, I too had to
depart, both at the command of my superiors, and lest by my
presence I should seem to countenance the counsels of the
ungodly."
The Council of Basle, after his withdrawal, and
that of the other Dominicans (except, I believe,
two), passed the well-known decree, in favour of
the Immaculate Conception, the cause unheard.
The decree, though received in France, was ignored
at Rome, and it seems no improbable conjecture
that the language of Eugenius, in his decree for
the Jacobines, was occasioned by this decree of
the Conciliabulum of Basle in conjunction with
Felix its Antipope. At least Pope Eugenius
uses the remarkable word " liberavit," which (like
those on whose force S. Antonine and others
8 See above, p. 72 sqq. Barthol. Spina, when he presided
over the publication of Turrecremata's work, was " S. Palatii
Apostolici Magister." — Card, de Lambertini de Fest. ii. xv.
n. 18.
Tradition not appealed to for Imm. Cone. 291
dwell, " redempta," " salvata "), rather implies that
she had been conceived in that original sin,
from which she is declared to have been "libe-
rated." One who had never been subject to it,
could hardly have been said to have been " freed "
from it.
" 9 The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes, and
teaches, that no one, ever conceived of man and woman, was
freed from the dominion of the devil, except through the
merit of the Mediator of Grod and man, Jesus Christ our
Lord, Who, being conceived without sin, born and dying,
Alone by His Death prostrated the enemy of mankind by
effacing our sins, and opened the entrance into the king-
dom of heaven, which the first man with his whole succes-
sion had lost through his own sin."
I wish I could see any strength in the evidence
in behalf of the Immaculate Conception. It was
not, like the tradition against it, the ground of the
belief which it is brought to support. The tide
was turned, not by setting up a counter-tradition,
but by an appeal to feeling. The only authorities
which Scotus adduces are that well-known passage
of S. Augustine, which speaks of " sins," and the
context of which certainly relates to actual sins,
and one passage of S. Anselm, which (as Albertus
Magnus and others observed) even by itself goes
the other way. He himself admits that the
common opinion at that time was that the B.V.
was conceived in original sin.
9 Cone. Flor. P. jii. Cone. T. 18. p. 1224. Col.
T 2
292 Abstract arguments of Scotus ; Imm. Cone.
" l It is commonly said, that she [the B. V.] was [conceived iu
original sin], on account of the authorities alleged, and for
reasons taken from two media, one of which is the excellence
of her Son. For He, as the universal Itedeemer, opened the
door to all; but if the B. V. had not contracted original sin,
she would not have needed a redeemer, nor would He have
opened the door to her, because it would not have been closed
against her. For it is not closed except for sin, and chiefly for
original sin. The second is from things which appear in the
B.Y. For she was propagated by the common law, and conse-
quently her body was propagated and formed of infected seed,
and thus there was the same reason of infection in her body
which there was in the body of another so propagated, and
since the soul is infected from the infected body, there was the
same ground of infection in her soul as there was in the souls
of others propagated in the common way."
To the first abstract argument he opposes one
yet more purely abstract, that Christ would not
have been an absolutely perfect Redeemer, Re-
conciler, Mediator, unless He had, to some one
person, been so in the most perfect possible degree.
But that this was to preserve her even from ori-
ginal sin.
He sets forth three ways of her Conception, as
equally possible : —
"1) God could effect that she should never have been in
original sin ; 2) He could also effect that she should only be
in one instant in original sin; 3) He could also effect that
she should be for some time in sin, and at the last instant of
that time should be cleansed."
On the first he says, —
" Grace is equivalent to original righteousness, as far as
1 Scotus iii. dist. 3. q. 1.
to be believed, if possible, in honour of B. V. 293
relates to the Divine acceptance, so that the soul which has
grace should not have original sin. Eor God could, in the first
instant of that soul, infuse into it so much grace, as into
another soul in Circumcision or Baptism. Therefore in that
instant the soul would not have had original sin, as neither
would it, if it had been afterwards baptized. And if even there
was infection of the flesh there, in the first instant, yet it was
not a necessary cause of the infection of the soul, as neither after
Baptism, when, according to many, it remains, and the infection
of the soul does not remain. Or the flesh could be cleansed
before the infusion of the soul, so that, in that instant, it
should not be infected V
On the second, —
" When a soul is in sin it can, through Divine power, be in
grace ; but in the time when she was conceived she could be
in sin, and was, according to you ; therefore, similarly, she could
be in grace. Nor was it necessary, then, that she should have
been in grace in the first instant of that time."
He summed up thus hesitatingly, —
" Which of these three, which have been shown to be pos-
sible, was done, God knoweth ; if it be not repugnant to the
authority of the Church or of Scripture, it seemeth probable
to attribute to Mary what is more excellent."
In a later place of the same book 3 (whatever
be the solution) he simply assumes, what he has
said before, " God only knew."
" The B. V., the Mother of God, who was never an enemy
by reason of actual sin, nor by reason of original (yet she
would have been unless she had been preserved)."
In his answers to the abstract arguments,
2 I.e. n. 9.
3 D. 18. q. 1. n. 13.
294 Scotus alleges not Scr. or trad, for what he holds
Scotus is of course invincible, as far as he lays
down that " with God all things are possible."
Thus, even on the supposition that the creation
and infusion of the soul were contemporaneous
with the first conception of the seed, he answers,
in this way, rightly, —
" 4 Granted that the creation of the soul had been in the
conception of the seed, there would have been nothing incon-
venient, that grace should have been then infused into the
soul, on account of which the soul would not have contracted
any infection from the flesh, though seminated with passion ;
for as after the first instant of Baptism the infection of the
body contracted through propagation could abide together
with grace in the cleansed soul, so it may in the first instant,
if God then created grace in the soul of Mary."
His weak side is the absence of all authority of
Scripture or tradition for what he states to be pos-
sible ; and, as we have seen already in some of the
opponents of his followers, that when Scripture and
tradition assert things as a fact, they were to be
interpreted, not as declaring a fact, but only a
liability to that fact.
"6 Every son of Adam is naturally debtor of original
righteousness, and from the demerits of Adam lacks it, and
therefore every such has whence he should contract original
sin ; but if, in the first instant of the creation of the soul, grace
were given to him, he, although he lacks original righteousness,
is never a debtor of it, because, through the merit of another
preventing the sin, grace is given to him, which, as regards
Divine acceptance, is equivalent to that righteousness, yea
4 I.e. q. 1. fin. c Eesp. n. 14.
to be probable: his followers — P. Petau. 295
exceeds it ; therefore, in himself every one would have original
sin, unless another prevented it by meriting ; and so are to be
explained the authorities, that all, naturally propagated from
Adam, are sinners i.e. in that way in which they have their
nature from Adam, whence they lack the due righteousness,
unless it be bestowed upon them from without, but as He
could bestow grace upon him after the first instant, so He could
in the first instant."
The followers of Scot us (as far as I have ob-
served) relied on their inferences from those same
two passages of S. Augustine and S. Anselm, and
on a narrow application of the principle, that a
festival was not kept except in regard to that
which is holy ; for, plainly, the celebration of the
Conception of her, who was to be the Mother of
the Redeemer of the world, must have been in
itself with reference to holiness, whether she was
sanctified in the first instant or afterwards.
In regard to the evidence since produced,
Petau, by one just observation, sweeps away a
great part of what used to be alleged.
" ° In most of them [the writings in behalf of the Immaculate
Conception], while I am wont to approve of the piety, and the
effort and zeal to adorn the most holy Mother of God, I miss
diligence and critical sagacity in the treatment of this question.
Eor they do not employ faithfulness and discrimination in
citing authors, which is, of all things, most necessary ; and, as
to those which they bring from antiquity, qualified to speak
(idoneos), they distort their sayings by false interpretations,
alien from their meaning. There is no need to speak of them
here individually. It is enough to give warning in general
0 De Inc. xiv. 3. 9.
296 Pe'tau ; irrelevant proofs of Imm. Cone. used.
terms as to one special head of their error, which has occupied
large part of such lucubrations. For if among the ancients,
especially the Greeks, there occur any thing which sounds, as
to the B. V., like a^pai/ros, a<£0apros, d/u'avros, i.e. c undefiled,
uncorrupted, unpolluted,' and more of this sort, they fly upon
it eagerly, as a Godsend, and adapt it to their purpose. But
it does not follow. For those too, who think that the B.V.
was infected [contactum] with the original stain, yet think
that, in part in the womb itself before she was born, in part,
just at the Conception of the Redeemer, she was overflowed
with such copious grace and holiness, that all the remains of
the original disease, together with the ' fomes,' as it is called,
of concupiscence, were healed or held down in perpetuity, as I
have just shown from S. Thomas, and other Theologians. For
which reason she might be called * immaculate ' and ' undefiled,'
although she had been overstreamed with the original fault.
For they too are called in Scripture ' undefiled ' and ' innocents,'
who, at the time present, are endued with righteousness and
holiness, though they were not exempt from original sin. So in
the 17th [18th] Psalm, he, who had owned himself * conceived in
iniquities,' says, 'I shall be undefiled before Him.' .... Paul too
says that we are elect, ' that we may be holy and immaculate.'
And in the Kevelation of John, he saith of virgins, that they
' are without spot before the throne of God ; ' and many more
of the same sort. They then are mistaken, who, from those
and the like words, which signify the highest purity and
integrity in the B.Y., think that their task is done, and employ
those, in whom they find these expressions, in witness of the
intact and immaculate Conception, which they wish to prove."
Perrone 7 " admits readily the warning," saying,
however, that he thinks that " it is not to be taken
so broadly, but restrained within certain bounds."
He does not say, what " bounds." Most of the
passages which he alleges, seem to me precisely of
7 1. c. p, 80.
Perrons; Acts of S. Andrew. 297
that sort against which Petau justly excepts, in
that a meaning is imported into them which they
have not naturally.
1. The first, which he cites, would, if certainly
genuine, have the same authority as Holy Scripture.
For they are words, ascribed to S. Andrew, an
inspired Apostle, in answer to the Prefect, in which
one should look for a special fulfilment of our Lord's
promise to the twelve8, "When they deliver you
up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak :
for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye
shall speak. For it is not ye that speak, but the
Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you."
Had the words alleged been certainly S. Andrew's,
and had they certainly had this meaning, the case
would have been ended, as much, I suppose, as if
they had stood in one of the Gospels. They are, —
" 9 The first man through the word of transgression brought
death, and it -was necessary that, through the word of the
Passion, death which had entered in should be cast out. And,
because the first man came of spotless earth, it was necessary
that the perfect Man should be conceived of a spotless virgin,
that the Son of God, Who formerly made man, should repair
that eternal life which man had lost through Adam."
But I know not why the term " spotless Virgin,"
should relate to any thing beyond the actual state
of great grace, when she conceived of the Holy
8 S. Matt. x. 19, 20.
. 9 Ep. Presb. et diac. Achaia? de martyr. S. Andr. c. 5. Gall,
i. 13(5.
298 Irrelevance of passages of S. Dionysius;
Ghost. If, as they say, the earth, of which Adam
was formed, was called " spotless," because it was
not yet subject to the curse on Adam's fall, then
the spotlessness of the B. V. would, from the
parallel, relate to that spotlessness which she had,
when"the Holy Ghost had come upon" her,and"the
Power of the Highest had overshadowed" her, and
she conceived Jesus. The parallel is between the
earth, when Adam was formed from it, and Mary,
when Jesus took His Human nature from her. All
which went before, is simply irrelevant to this point.
In like way, it appears to me, that none of the
passages which Perrone alleges, go beyond proving
a belief in her actual immaculateness, except Pas-
chasius Radbertus, who implies a sanctification in
her mother's womb, as would S. Maximus of Turin,
if, which I doubt, the present text is correct.
2. Without entering into the question as to the
genuineness of the two works quoted as S. Dionysius'
of Alexandria, I do not think that it would occur
to any one, who had not a thesis to maintain, that
they even bore on the Immaculate Conception !.
1 They are, 1. " Many mothers shall be found ; but one only
Virgin, daughter of life, bore the living Word, Self-subsistent,
uncreate and Creator." Ep. adv. Paul. Samos. p. 212
ed. Rom. 1796. 2. "He (Christ) did not dwell in a servant,
but in His own holy tabernacle not made with hands, which, is
Mary the Theotokos. There, in her, our King, the King of
Grlory, became a High Priest; and He, having once entered
into the holy place, abides for ever." Eesp. ad qusest. vii. Paul.
Sam. p. 261. 3. "He came down to Moses to deliver the
of Pseudo - Origen . 299
3. The two homilies, ascribed by the original
collector 2 to Origen, have long been known not to
people, and now in these last days coming for our sakes, not in
a figure of fire, but conceived in the womb of the Virgin Mary
(the Holy Spirit coming down upon her) and preserving
His Mother uu corrupt, blessed from her feet to her head,
as He Alone knows the mode of His own Conception and
Birth. This is she, whom Isaac, foreseeing, said to Jacob, ' The
Lord give thee the blessing of heaven from above, and the
blessing of the earth which hath all things.' For He Who
descended from heaven, the Only-Begotten God the Word,
having been borne in the womb, which hath all things : viz.
the Holy Spirit upon her; the power of the Highest overshadow-
ing, and the Holy Child Jesus born of the virginal Paradise."
Resp. ad qu. x. p. 278. 4. " For from what time the King
of Peace vouchsafed to become to us a Priest of Peace, no
one, God forbid, is seen who succeeded to this Priesthood ;
nor did any one go out, save the Lord only ; and the door of
the tabernacle was sealed safe and unbroken and undefiled;
for it was pitched by the Hand of God and sealed by His
finger. Nor was our High Priest ordained by hand of man,
or His tabernacle formed by men, but was fixed by the Holy
Spirit, and by the virtue of the Most Highest is that ever
memorable tabernacle of God, Mary Theotokos and Virgin,
protected." Eesp. ad qu. v. p. 240. Of these; the first,
" daughter of life," is entirely vague. The second relates to
the glory accruing to her from the Incarnation ; the words
" tabernacle not made with hands," if they were pressed, would
rather imply that she was created in the womb of S. Anne,
as our Lord's Human Body was in hers. The third rather
relates to, what the Fathers so often insist upon, her illsesa
Virginitas, by and after the Birth of our Lord. The fourth
relates to her perpetual Virginity, the figure of the Eastern
door (Ezek. xliv. 1 — 3), which was shut except for the Prince
only, being often used by the Fathers as symbolizing the per-
petual virginity.
2 Merlin, in the Latin edition, Paris, 1512.
300 Pseudo-Origen.
be his. Of the first, Huet says 8, " Let any one
guess the author, who loves to divine. It occurs in
an old Lectionary of the Royal Library." " Neither
in doctrine nor style is it like Origen." " The
style shows that the writer was a Latin." So,
in his judgment, is the second, and of " a writer later
than S. Jerome." But, further, the passages affirm
the actual sinlessness, without any reference to her
own Conception, and with reference to that of our
Lord. They fall under Petau's canon, that " Im-
maculate " cannot betoken any thing exclusively of
the B.V., since it is used in Holy Scripture of
those not absolutely without sin 4.
3 Origeniana, App. n. 5.
4 " Of this Only-Begotten of God, this Virgin Mary is called
the Mother, worthy [Mother] of "Worthy, immaculate of Holy
Immaculate, one of One, unique of Unique. For no other only-
begotten came upon earth, nor did any other virgin conceive
the Only-begotten" (Orig. Opp. T. iii. fol. 115. v. Paris,
1512). The second occurs in a supposed address of an angel
to Joseph, to allay his suspicions as to her innocency ; " re-
ceive her then as a heavenly treasure commended to you, trea-
sure of Deity, as fullest sanctity, as perfect righteousness :
receive her as the mansion of the Only-Begotten, as an
honourable temple, as a house of God, as belonging to the
Creator of all, as the undefiled house of the King, the heavenly
Bridegroom" (fol. 116). Standing in contrast with suspicion
of unrighteousness, probably the words ought not to be taken
as affirming any doctrine at all. The third is an address to
other mothers who had conceived in concupiscence. " Hear
ye, that a- virgin will be with child, not conceiving through
concupiscence, who was neither deceived by persuasion of
the serpent, nor infected by his venomous breath, but a
virgin shall be with child, receiving the announcement of the
angel, taking the testimonies of the prophets" (f. 116. v.).
S. Hippolytus, S. Ephraim. 301
4. S. Hippolytus, as Perrone himself owns, is
speaking of the marvellous Conception of our Lord
without defiling human agency. The image of the
" incorruptible wood5 " implies, at most (which all
must believe), her actual holiness, when Christ our
Lord was conceived of her by operation of the Holy
Ghost,
5. S. Ephraim simply calls the B. V. " guileless,"
much in the sense of the English word G. The
The fourth is a comment on the words of the angel, " Take the
child and His mother." " Thou art not father to this Child,
but the Virgin alone is mother to this Child. He needeth not
a father upon earth ; for He hath a Father Incorruptible on
high. He needeth not a mother in heaven ; He hath an im-
maculate and chaste mother on earth, this much-blessed Virgin
Mary, as one saith, ' without mother and without father, like
unto the Son of God.' So that He is understood to be the
Son of God, complete without father on earth, without
mother in heaven ; without father as to the body ; without
mother as to the Deity" (f. 120. v.). We have here simply
the word " immaculate," and that, united to the word " chaste ;"
which is often especially used of the Virginal conception.
5 " The ark of wood, which could not decay, was the Saviour
Himself. For hereby His tabernacle, incapable of decay or
corruption, was signified, which engendered no decay of sin.
But the Lord was without sin, and from wood, not liable to
putrefaction, in His human nature, i.e. of the Virgin and the
Holy Ghost, encompassed, within and without, as it were, with
the purest gold of the Word of God."— On Ps. xxiv., " The
Lord is my Shepherd," in Gall. ii. 496, Fragm. vi.
6 Opp. Syr. ii. 327, where the hymn, the beginning of which
Perrone quotes from Assem. Proleg. Opp. Gr. T. ii. p. Ivii., is
given at length. The exact rendering is, "Both guileless
(berirotho), both simple (peshitotho) ; Mary and Eve are
put in comparison': one was the cause of our death, the other
of our life.'*
302 Greek prayers, given to S. Htyhraim, not his ;
quality which he ascribes to her here, is the same
which our Lord exhorts to cherish, " Be ye wise as
serpents, simple as doves ;" it is a " simplicity "
which needs the check of " prudence " to prevent
its degenerating into a fault. For so he explains
himself7.
He speaks also of her having a second birth from
our Lord8, of her being purified by the Light in-
dwelling in her, when He dwelt in her9.
I have not dwelt upon the Greek prayers to the
Blessed Virgin, ascribed by Voss to St. Ephraim,
because, (I.) They are beyond question neither his
nor of an early date; some look to me like later
adaptations of prayers once addressed to God.
7 S. Ephraim uses the two equivalents beriro and peshitQ. He
says, " Eve's simplicity (pesliitutho) was without prudence ('ari-
mutho) ; Mary made prudence ('arimutho) the salt of her
simplicity (peshitutho) ; and there is no taste in the word of
guilelessness (berirutho) without prudence ('arimutho), nor any
confidence in cleverness (nekilutho) without simplicity (peshi-
tutho). For fault is near akin to all guilelessness (berirutho), and
sin is nigh again to all cunning (tzeniutho):" and, after a few
words, "\eiguilelessness (berirutho) season cunning (tzeniutho);
let prudence ('arimutho) give zest to simplicity (peshitutho) ;
let prudence ('arimutho) be guileless (beriro), simplicity
(peshitutho) prudent ('arimo)." Perrone (p. 312) was misled
by the Latin translation " SINE NOXA," as he prints it.
8 " As by a second birth [i. e. in time, contrasted with His
eternal generation] I brought Him forth, so did He bring me
forth by a second birth ; because He put His Mother's garment
on, she clothed her body with His glory." Select Works,
p. 51, Oxf. Tr.
9 Opp. Syr. ii, 328, quoted Ib. p. 86, n. f.
express only actual undefiledness. 303
(2.) Although they have a large variety of terms,
expressive of her actual undefiledness !, there is not
one which has any bearing on the doctrine of the
Immaculate Conception. The only semblance of
such bearing has been gained through an inaccu-
rate Latin translation, which has given an idea of
past time2, where even the Greek only speaks of
the present. Even had the Greek writer spoken
of the undefiledness of the B.V. in the past (which
he does not), such a statement as "who was ever
perfect and immaculate both in body and spirit/'
would naturally only express, that, what she was,
that she had been from the first. A declaration
that the actual holiness of any saint had dated back
from the first, would naturally imply that such had
been the case ever since the first use of free-will.
The question of the Immaculate Conception ob-
viously lies beyond this. No prolongation back-
1 The expressions are "all-holy" (Vaj/ayia, Opp. Gr. iii.
pp. 542, 543, ed. Ass.), "my all-holy one" (iravayia pov,
p. 546), "all-blameless" (irava/uiifie, pp. 528. 540), "all-un-
blamed" (Trai/a/Aw/x^re, p. 535), "all-unstained"
pp. 526. 542. 545), "alone all-unstained"
"all-unspotted" (Travda-mXe) , " all-undefiled "
" all-uncorrupted " (iravd^Oope), "all-unhurt
p. 528), " all-hallowed" (irava-yvc, pp. 541, 542. 546).
2 The expression upon which Perrone lays special emphasis,
"SEMPER BENEDICTAH " (as he prints it), simply represents
TravTevXoyrjTe, " all-blessed " (p. 535), which, of course, does
not involve any idea of time. Time is also represented in the
" Quse semper fait turn corpore turn anima Integra et immacu-
lata," which is not in the Greek. (See below, in note 6,
p. 308.)
304 S. Ephraim owned not to speak oflmm. Cone.
wards of actual holiness can have any bearing
upon that which preceded the power of choice, the
condition of the unborn babe in her mother's womb.
A Marian writer owns this, even as to the Greek
prayers attributed to S. Ephraim.
" 3 S. Ephraim, if I remember right, never speaks
on this doctrine [the Immaculate Conception]
distinctly, but he calls Mary ' the wholly undefiled,'
c wholly uncorrupted,' ' wholly removed from all
stain of sin,' 'fully pure4.' He compares her with
a pearl, which, ever free from all stain, reflects the
light of the sun5."
But these are the very terms from which Petau
observes that wrong, irrelevant inferences were
made6. Nay, the very accumulation of such terms,
3 Zingerle, Marien Rosen aus Damascus, p. viii. ed. 2.
4 These represent some of the Greek words in p. 303, note 1.
5 This is founded on a passage versified by Zingerle, p. 64,
in prose thus, " Like the pearl, which free from spots, glistens
in the sun, is the maiden who bore to us the Son of God.
Turn it round on every side and ever [i. e. in every part] the
blinding light beams forth, which beams forth from heaven."
The sun is our Lord Himself, as St. Ephr. says to the
pearl, "Perhaps thy mystery hath respect to the womb
which bare the light." Margarit. Serm. 2. T. iii. p. 155. Syr.
S. Ephraim compares our Lord's generation to that of the
pearl (Select Works, p. 88) ; the light within it, which flashes
forth from it, is His own Deity, when He vouchsafed to lie
hid in the Virgin's womb, "then glistened from her His
gracious shining" (pp. 85, 86, comp. p. 95 ib.). The " ever "
in the sense of time, does not occur in Zingerle's own version.
He does not say whence he took the passage.
c See above, p. 296.
Great actual holiness of B. V. irrelevant. 305
without any one hint as to any thing beyond actual
holiness, implies the more that the thought was not
in the mind of the writer. Some of the terms as
to her actual holiness would he hyperbolic7 if they
related to her personally; some of them are terms
employed of God alone8; their dogmatic meaning
seems to be (as is almost said in one place9), that
by virtue of the Incarnation, the B. V. had a
holiness imparted to her, above the holiness of any
created being. This is, of course, true ; but then,
since this holiness came to her after years of pre-
paration, it is the more manifest that it has nothing
to do with the doctrine of the Immaculate Concep-
tion.
S. Ephraim uses, of an ordinary religious birth,
terms which, had they been used of the B. V., would
r vrcpayta, "hyper-holy" (p. 528); inrcpTravdyaOe, "hyper-
all-good" (p. 545) ; "hyper-purer than the rays of the sun "
(ib.). \nrepKa6apos and vTrepayios are epithets of God. Eust.
Opusc. p. 235. 270.
8 Travayia, Trava^pavre. Travayios is given in Stephen's Lex.
(ed. Dindorf.) as a title of Jesus, of the Holy Ghost, of the
Holy Trinity ; Travayta, of the Host.
9 This connexion is pointed out in the "thence" of the
following address (Ib. p. 524). " All-holy (iravayia) lady,
mother of God, who alone art most pure both in soul and
body ; who alone art above all purity and chastity and virginity,
who alone becamest, all of thee (oXry), the dwelling-place of the
whole grace of the All-holy (iravayiov) Spirit, and thence in-
comparably surpassing even the immaterial powers themselves
in purity and sanctification of mind and body" (Ib. p. 524).
The time relates to the Incarnation ; " becamest," i. e. what she
before had not been.
300 S. Ambrose speaks of actual grace.
have been thought to prove her Immaculate Con-
ception.
*' * My son, tenderly beloved, who wast formed by grace in
his mother's womb, and Divine goodness completely formed
thee."
6. S. Ambrose speaks of the freedom of the B.V.
from sin "through grace," consequently from
actual sin 2.
7. It seems almost a paradox to cite S. Augus-
tine on this side, in face of such passages as
those, whose force Petau admitted, as proving
that that great father did not hold the B. V. to be
exempted from the universal consequences of human
conception. Of the one passage, I have already
said why it seems to me to involve the contrary <?.
So also, I think, does his answer to Julian's im-
putation upon the Church's belief as to original
1 S. Ephr. Can. 36. T. vi. p. 293. Dr. Burgess, Select
Hymns, p. 1.
2 S. Ambrose is paraphrasing the last verse of the 119th
Psalm : " ' I have gone astray like a lost sheep, seek Thy
servant,' is a prayer to our Lord, to receive him in His Incar-
nation ; t Come then, seek Thy sheep, no longer through Thy
servants, not through hirelings, but by Thyself. Receive me,
in that flesh which fell in Adam ; receive me [being born] not
from Sarah but from Mary, that it may be a Virgin undefiled,
but a virgin, through grace free from all stain of sin. Bear
me on Thy Cross, which is the salvation of the erring, where
alone is rest to the weary, where alone live all, who die.'"
Serm. 22 in Ps. cxviii. n. 30. Often as the passage has been
quoted, I am at a loss to see what can be thought to bear on
the Immaculate Conception.
3 See above, pp. 67—69.
S. Aug. here too implies cone, in orig. sin. 307
sin : " Thou transferrest Mary herself to the devil
by the condition of birth." He answers 4, " We do
not transfer Mary to the devil by the condition of
birth; but on this ground, because the condition
itself is dissolved by the grace of re-birth." S.
Augustine does not even give a special answer
to the charge. He gives one answer which applies
to all Christians ; the ill condition of birth is un-
done by the grace of re-birth. This is true of
each of us through Holy Baptism, S. Augustine
does not say that the condition of Mary's birth was
different from that of others : he only says that it
was undone. But if it was undone, then it was
there, to be undone.
8. Theodotus, of Ancyra, A.D. 430, in one of the
places alleged, is only speaking of the greatness
bestowed upon the Blessed Virgin through the
Incarnation 5 ; in the other (which is published only
4 Op. Imp. c. Julian, iv. 122.
5 " O Virgin, who surpassest the very Paradise of Eden. For
that produced the kind of plants propagated by suckers, the
plants springing from the virgin earth ; this Virgin was better
than that earth. For she produced not fruit-bearing trees, but
the Rod of Jesse bringing a saving Fruit to men ; both that was
virgin-earth and she a virgin ; but there God commanded trees
to grow; of this virgin 'the Creator Himself was, according to
the flesh, the Germ. Neither did that earth receive a sucker
before its trees [i. e. the trees were created directly without
the ordinary propagation through suckers], nor did she injure
her virginity by bearing. The Virgin was made more glorious
than paradise. For it was made the culture (ycwpytov) of God ;
but she, according to the flesh, cultivated (cycwpy^o-ev) God
u 2
308 Theodotus Anc. speaks of adult graces.
in a Latin translation), he is contrasting her inno-
cence, in part with no very high standard of
female character, in part with the disobedience of
Eve, of which contrast I hope to say something
hereafter. Else he is speaking only of her adult
graces 6.
Himself, when He willed to be united with human nature.
Hast thou seen how wondrous the mystery became, transcending
the order of nature ? Hast thou seen the thing which is above
nature, wrought by the sole power of God ? " Horn, in Nativ.
J. C. in Cone. Eph. Par. i. c. ix. p. 151, 2, ed. Col. quoted by
Perrone, pp. 318, 19.
6 "For the serpent, the author of evil, who had brought grief
into the world, the Archangel, bringing glad tidings of joy,
precedes the descent of the Lord from heaven ; instead of him
who thought it gain to be equal with God, He, "Who is by
nature God and Lord, is Author of the regeneration of that
nature which He had made ; for her who had been a minister of
death, the virgin Eve, there is chosen for the service of life a
Virgin, most acceptable to God and full of the grace of God ;
a Virgin comprehended in the female sex but apart from female
wickedness, a Virgin, innocent, spotless, free from all fault,
unstained, undefiled (probably acnuAos, Trava/xoo/xos, ax/oavro?,
d/xoXwTos, or the like, see above, p. 303), holy in mind and body
(1 Cor. vii. 34), as a lily flowering in the midst of thorns (Cant,
ii. 2), not taught the evils of Eve, not defiled by human vanity,
not instructed in old wives' fables, her ears unpolluted with
evil words, her tongue undefiled with dishonest language, her
eyes uninfected by illicit sight ; who had not fouled her native
colour by adventitious tints of luxury, or painted her cheeks
&c., but who, while yet unborn, was consecrated to God her
Maker, and when born, was offered as a memorial of gratitude,
to remain as a sacred guest in the shrine and temple, &c.
Her, worthy of her Maker, Divine Providence gave us, to gain
good ; not to incite to disobedience, but a leader to obedience ;
nor to hold forth a deadly fruit, but to give Bread of life, <fcc."
S. Chrysostom, S. Proclus speak of the Inc. 309
9. The writer, formerly known as S. Chrysostom,
is dwelling wholly on marvels of the Incarnation 7.
10. The passages of S. Proclus, and whoever be
the author of the 6th Homily (whether he or
another), are answers to men's marvellings at the
mystery of the Incarnation; that it was no degra-
dation to God. Two of the passages have not any
seeming bearing even on the actual immaculateness
of the B.V. We must needs believe much more
than they express. No thinking person can doubt
that the Blessed Virgin was created by God in
special view of the Incarnation. It is inseparable
7 " He is born of a virgin who knew not the matter ; for
neither did she co-operate to that which took place, nor did she
contribute to what was done, but she was the mere organ
of His ineffable power, knowing only, what she learnt when
she inquired of Gabriel, ' How shall this be to me, since I know
not a man ?' And he said, ' Wouldest thou learn this ? The
Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the
Highest shall overshadow thee.' And how was He with her
and a little after from her ? As an architect, having found
most useful material, worketh therefrom a most beautiful vessel,
so also Christ, having found the soul and body of the Virgin,
holy, adorned for Himself a living shrine. Having formed Man
in the Virgin, in what way He willed, and having clad Himself
with Him, He came forth to day, not ashamed of the deformity
of the nature. For neither did it bring disgrace to Him, to
bear His own work, and His creation reaped the greatest
glory, becoming the raiment of the Creator. Tor as in the
first formation man could not be, until the clay came into His
hands, so also it was impossible that the corrupted vessel should
be re-made, unless it became the clothing of its Maker " (in Nat.
Christi diem, Opp. vi. 395).
310 S. Proclus, Sedulius, if pressed,
from the very thought of God, that He did and
doeth all which He doeth or has done, all and
every thing, with a special fitness to its end. We
believe that, such as we are individually, He has
made us with that special combination of qualities,
which is fittest for our development by His grace.
We would not desire one quality, or gift, or endow-
ment of nature more, believing that He made us
more wisely than we could make ourselves. How
much more, when He willed to make one for an
office, alone in His whole creation ; in her to unite
Himself with His creation, and to take our human
nature into God ! The Incarnation, from its
extreme condescension, was and is a special offence
to human intellect, which Christians had to clear
from censure 8.
The second passage is so strong, that if the
imagery were pressed at all (which it ought not to
be), it would rather imply some human defilement
and disease of our sick nature in the Blessed Virgin 9.
8 " Be not ashamed, O man, of this parturition ; for it has
become to us the occasion of salvation. For had He not been
born of a woman, He had not died ; if He had not died, He
would not through His Death have destroyed him who hath
the power of death, i. e. the devil. It is no reproach to the
Architect to abide in what He has constructed ; the clay denies
not the potter, renewing the vessel which he made. So neither
does it pollute the Undefiled God to come forth from the
Virgin's womb ; for what He was not denied by making, He
was not defikd-coming forth from it." Orat. i. n. 3. Gall. ix.
615.
9 Our Lord is introduced, saying to the B.V., " I shall not
would imply cone, in orig. sin. 311
But then the less ought the allusion in the third
passage to the clay of which Adam was made, to
be pressed on the other side '. Proclus could use the
image of " good clay " of one born of good parents.
11. The lines of Sedulius, A.D. 434, if pressed,
would rather imply the contrary, as De Bandelis
alleged them2. They speak of her, in her actual
grace, as unlike the rest of mankind, but they speak
also of the stain of the old man being first put
aside by the Birth of Christ3. He too, like
defile, as thou thinkest, the royal sandal, if I tread on a crea-
ture of clay. I shall not dishonour My uncreated dignity if I
indwell the house created by Myself. Tor neither do the
muddy masses injure the rays of the sun, nor again do the
diseased wounds soil the hands of the physician. Know that
God proceedeth from thee, He doth not begin from thee," &c.
Orat. vi. n. 14. Gall. ix. 642.
1 " Let us learn what meaning had this ignorance of Joseph.
He knew not the mystery which was being accomplished in the
Virgin, of what marvel she was the minister. He knew not
that the Christ prophesied-of was being gendered of the woman
espoused to himself; he knew not that the prophet like unto
Moses was coming forth from the maiden who knew not mar-
riage ; he knew not that she could become a temple of God,
who was formed of good [" pure " one MS.] clay ; he knew not
that by the undefiled hands of the Lord, the second Adam is
being again formed from the Virgin Eden ; he knew not that the
Author of the dry ground is created without seed." Proclus,
Orat. vi. n. 8, p. 637.
2 P. 57.
3 His verse, rendered word for word into prose, runs thus: —
" And as the soft rose riseth from the sharp thorns,
Having nothing which hurts, and in honour obscureth its
mother,
312 Writer " agst.five heresies" rather implies that,
St. Bruno 4, or rather like St. Paul, speaks of the
two lines of the human race, the one, beginning with
Adam, the other, with Christ. Mary was at once
the end of the old, in that she was conceived after
the way of nature, and the beginning of the new,
in that she gave birth to Him Who was " in-
carnate of the Holy Ghost and born of" her ; Him,
the Beginning of our new creation. Taken lite-
rally, Sedulius says, in fact, that that old vitiated
nature was not re-born, until the birth of Christ.
12. The Manichee, whom the post-Augustinian
author of "the treatise against the five heresies" is
answering, objected to the mystery of the Incarna-
tion in itself. The writer insists, 1) that there
So, from the stem of Eve the Sacred Mary coming,
A new Virgin should the old virgin's misdeed expiate ;
That, since the former nature vitiated was lying
Tinder death's domain, Christ being born, man might be
re-born,
And lay aside the stain of the ancient flesh."
Carm. Pasch. ii. vv. 28, sqq.
In the prose in which Sedulius afterwards re- wrote the Car-
men Paschale, he says, " As the rose, sweet and most soft,
comes from the thorny sod, not to injure its mother which by the
grace of sweetness it obscures, so, from the stem of injuring
Eve Mary coming with sacred Light, the subsequent Virgin
might efface the destructiveness of the first virgin, that the former
nature, which, stained with vices, was subjected to the condition
of hard death, when Christ was born through man, man also
might be re-born through Christ, to lay aside the foulness of
the original stain by the renewal of the oldness of the body."
Pasch. Op. L. ii. c. 1, Gall. ix. 574,
* See above, pp. 159, 160.
where passion is, there defilement is. 313
could be no defilement in a Virgin-birth, where
there had been no passion; 2) that God had Him-
self both formed and purified her of whom He
vouchsafed to be born ; i. e. first formed, then
purified5. One would not argue from an incidental
expression; else this language would rather imply,
in conformity with St. Augustine's teaching, that,
had there been passion, there might have been
defilement. But, at the least, he does not say that
God created her free from all sin. He does say two
things, 1) that He Himself was not defiled in
creating the B. V., nor in being born of her; 2)
that He purified her for His own Coming.
6 "The Creator of man, the Son of man, saith to him,
' What is it which moveth thee in My Birth ? I was not con-
ceived by the cupidity of passion. I made the mother, of whom
I was to be born ; I prepared and cleansed the way for My
Coming. She whom thou despisest, Manicha3an, is My mother,
but was made by My hand. If I could be defiled when I made
her, I could be defiled when I was born of her. As her vir-
ginity was not injured by My passage, so was My Majesty not
stained there. As the sun's rays can dry up the defilements of
sewers, but cannot be defiled by them, how much more can the
Brightness of the Eternal Light, which no defilement reacheth,
cleanse, wherever it irradiates, Itself cannot be defiled ! Pool !
whence came defilement in a virgin-mother, where there was
no concumbency with man, a father ? "Whence defilement in
her, who, neither in conceiving experienced passion, nor, in
bearing, pangs ? Whence defilement in a house which no in-
habitant approached ? Its Maker and Lord alone came into
it, arrayed Himself with the garment which He had not " [our
human nature], "and left it closed, as He found it." Cont. 5
Hsereses, n. 7, App. Opp. S. Aug. viii. p. 6,
314 Chrysol.y B. V. pledged to Xt. in mother's womb.
13. S. Peter Chrysologus, A.D. 433, affirms only
that she was pledged to Christ in her mother's
womb 6, which expresses only what we must all
believe, that she was then, as in all eternity, pre-
destined to be the Mother of God. But this can
the less prove the Immaculate Conception, in that
so many, who did not believe it, believed her yet to
have been sanctified in her mother's womb.
14. We have not any ground to think that we have
any definite thing which was certainly S. Sabba's.
His Typicon or Directory was destroyed in a bar-
barian invasion, and was re-written by S. John
Damascene7. But further the ode, which the
6 " The speeding messenger flies to the spouse, to remove
the spouse of God from human espousal and to suspend her
affections, not to take away the Virgin from Joseph but to
restore her to Christ, to Whom she was pledged [pignorata] in
the womb, when being formed. Christ therefore receives His
spouse, does not carry off another's; nor does He make a
severance, when He joins His own creature in one body wholly
to Himself." Serm. 140 de Annunt. B. M. V. Eibl. Patr. vii.
953, col. 1, quoted by Perr. p. 312. Perrone prints " CUM
FIERET," "when being formed," in capitals ; but, since the whole
period in the womb is one course of formation (Psalm cxxxix.
15, 16) " cum fieret " cannot be limited to the one moment of
the infusion of her soul, even if the being " pledged " to Christ
expressed any spiritual gift.
7 Simeon of Thessalonica relates, that " it had almost dis-
appeared, after the place had been destroyed by the barbarians ;
that Sophronius, Patriarch of the Holy City, put it forth, having
bestowed much pains upon it ; and after him John Damascene
renewed, and having written, delivered it." Dial. c. Haer. (in
Leo Allat. de libb. Eccl. Or. Div. 1. p. 5. in Fabr. Bibl. Or. T.
v. Hamb. 1712). In another place he speaks of S. Sabba and
S. Sabba's work lost; ode relates to Inc. 315
Bollandists quote, is referred to anonymously in the
Typicon, is given anonymously in the Greek hymn-
books, the Anthologion and the Biblion, and all
notice of it is omitted in the two MSS. to which
I have access 8. Further, Leo Allatius complains
specifically of the interpolations in the Typicon9.
I know not then, on what authority the Bollandists
state the ode, which they quote in Latin, to be S.
Sabba's ]. But it has no bearing on the Immaculate
Conception 2.
John Damascene as joint "writers and legislators." "The two
composed the Typicon ; for the great John, after that from the
divine Sabba had been destroyed by the incursion of the bar-
barians, composed and cast [SieTUTrcoo-aro] it throughout from the
beginning according to the order from the first."
9 In a Wake MS. at Christ Church, of the 12th century, of
the Typicon of the Lavra of S. Sabba in Jerusalem, there is no
mention of this ode, which begins, Ke/cpr/A/xei/oi/ TO /ufcm/pioi/, under
March 24. There occurs only the o>s ytwcuov lv pap-rua-iv, upon
which, in the printed books, the other hymn is to follow. There
is equally no reference to the hymn in a Lincoln Coll. MS. of the
16th century, which is independent of that of Christ Church.
9 Leo Allatius subjoins to his account of the Typicon,
" Would that we could apply ourselves to the Divine service of
Christ from those first fountains, as being more correct and
pure ! So should we distinguish the tares, sown subsequently
by the enemy." P. 8.
1 On March 25.
2 It is, " Gabriel the Archangel is entrusted with the hidden
mystery, unknown to Angels, and will now come to thee, the
only undefiled and beautiful dove, and the recalling [dvaKXrjo-iv,
the Bollandists have * reformationem,' as though there had stood
avaTrXao-tv] of the race, and shall soon cry aloud to thee, all-holy
one, the ' hail.' Prepare thou through the word to receive God
the Word in thy flanks."
316 S. Columban's Psalter; all in original sin;
Of the other passages (which are cited as S.
Sabba's, in Latin only, by books to which I have
no access3, nor to the Greek original), the one
doubtless owes the force ascribed to it, to the
paraphrastic character of the Latin translation 4 ;
the second relates probably to the Incarnation, in
which sin was destroyed and its .reign checked, of
which her being was the earnest, since for this she
was created 5 ; the third relates to personal blame-
lessness only 6.
15. The Psalter, which Vallars ascribes to S.
Columban, A.D. 589, speaks in the most absolute
way of the conception of the whole human race
in original sin.
" This verse (Ps. iv. 5) explains the fall of the whole human
3 The second passage is cited in Perrone from Hypp. Mar-
racci in Mariali S. Germani, Bom. 1650 ; the two others from
Vangnereck, Pietas MarisB, p. 212. Neither is in the Bodleian
or British Museum.
4 " In thee, who never wast akin to any fault, I place all my
hope. None is equally blameless as thou, Lady, nor is any
undefiled beside thee, 0 thou subject to no stain." As " in
omni genere sanctitatis perfecta " represents Trarayia, so doubt-
less the " NULLI TJNQFAM CDLP2E AFFiNis " («is Perrone prints
it) a/xto/xov, or some similar Greek word.
5 " In thee the lapse of the first parent stood still, the power
of further progress being taken away."
0 " O Joachim, breathed on by divine beauty ; thou too,
Anna, divinely bright. Te are two torches, from whom arose
the lamp, around which we see no trace of shadow." My son,
after a long search, could not find any of them in places which
seemed the most promising.
praises her immaculate Conception of Jesus. 317
race, as in Job, ' Not even if a day old upon the earth, can he
be clean from the defilement of sin.' For he is conceived and
born in original sin, which is derived from Adam, but is
purified by Baptism through the grace of Christ."
It is nothing contradictory to this, that, applying
the symbol so often used of our Lord or the Blessed
Virgin, he says on the Psalm, " He led them in a
cloud of day,"
" ' Lo, the Lord comes to Egypt in a light cloud.' The light
cloud we ought either to understand properly to be the Body of
the Saviour, because It was light and weighed down by no sin ;
or else we ought to understand the light cloud to be holy
Mary, nullo semine humano praegravatain. Lo, the Lord came
to the Egypt of this world, on a light cloud, the Yirgin. ' And
He led them in a cloud of day.' Well did he say of 'day,'
for that cloud was not in darkness, but always in light."
Even ordinary Christians are called children of
the light, so there is nothing to imply more than
actual sinlessness. But, beyond this, the contrast
between our Lord's Body and the Blessed Virgin,
as marked by the words, " nullo — prsegravatam,"
seems to imply that he did not believe the Blessed
Virgin to be free from all sin, i.e., not from
original sin. He gives the force of the word " light,"
to be " not weighed down by." Of our Lord he
says, that He was " not weighed down by sin ;" of the
B.V., in contrast with this, he does not say that
she was not weighed down by sin, but by some-
thing else. In our Lord he extols the absolute
sinlessness; in the B. V. her Conception of our
Lord, not by man, but by the Holy Ghost.
318 Andrew Cret. or Germanus,
10. Whoever Hesychius, Presbyter of Jerusalem
was, or whatever his age, he was manifestly speak-
ing of the actual graces of the Blessed Virgin in
conquering Satan's assaults.
" r * Lo, a Virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and they
shall call His Name, Emmanuel.' 'Lo, a Virgin!' "What
Virgin? She who is the chosen of women, the elect of
Virgins, the excellent ornament of our race, the boast of our
clay, who freed Eve from shame and Adam from threat, who
cut off the boast of the dragon, when the smoke of desire and
the word of soft pleasure hurt her not."
17, 18. It seems doubtful whether any of the
passages quoted by Perrone belong to Andrew of
Crete8, A.D. 635. The homilies, quoted as his, and
those attributed to Germanus, A.D. 715, mutually
illustrate one another. The strongest words quoted in
proof of the Immaculate Conception only bear upon
it through a faulty rendering of a faulty text. They
7 Horn. 2 in Virg. M. Bibl. Gr. Lat. Paris, 1624, T. ii.
p. 423.
8 The first is from a homily on the Zone of the B. V. begin-
ning TIS 6 <£ai8po9 o-vAAoyos, which Ballerini (Diss. de homiliis
Germane adscriptis, Pareri, x. 259) claims for S. Germanus ;
the second and third are from the Horn. i. de Nativ. B. V.,
apxrj pev fjfuv copruv (Combefis Auct. i. 1295) ; but, if the
second homily on the Nativity of the B. V., el /Ltcrpetrat yrj
(77ri0a/x,7j is Germanus' s (as it is claimed in the Bibl. Patr. Gr.
Lat. Paris, 1624, ii. 456), then I should think the first is so
too. Leo Allatius ascribes the homily, beginning ei juer/oetrat, to
George of Nicomedia, A.D. 880, " on the authority of the oldest
MSS." (Diss. de Georgiis in Fabric. Bibl. Gr. L. v. T. x. p.
611, Hamb. 1737). There can, I think, be no doubt that they
belong to the same writer.
proof drawn from corrupt text. 319
relate, according to the genuine text, to our Blessed
Lord's Incarnation 9. In the second homily on the
9 " To-day the created lias been built a temple of the Creator
of all, and the creature is being prepared after a new fashion,
a Divine habitation for the Creator. To-day, the nature, which
was before put forth from earth, receives a beginning of deify-
ing (comp. 2 S. Pet. i. 4), and the dust hastens to run aloft on
high to the supremest glory. To-day, from' us, for us, Adam,
offering a first-fruit to God, maketh Mary a first-fruit, and the
Leaven of the whole lump, having been first kneaded through
her, is made Bread for the re-formation of the race." Horn. i.
in Nat. B. M. V. in Cornbefis, Nov. Auctar. i. col. 1293, 96,
Paris, 1648. The Greek text is rov o\ov (f>vpdjj,a.To<s rj £^77 TT/DO-
cfrvpaOtta-a SC avTTJs apToiroiei-rai Trpos TT)V TOT) yevous OVO.TT\O.(TLV.
The only question which can arise is, whether the " leaven " is
our Lord's Flesh, which was first her's, " having been fore-
kneaded through her," or whether he speaks of it as first exist-
ing in her, and calls it " leaven " because it was the flesh which,
in Him, was to be " the Bread which came down from heaven "
" to give life to the world." This is favoured by the like pas-
sage in the second homily. On the other hand, in the homily
" on the falling asleep of the B. V.," attributed to G-ermanus,
he addresses the B. V., " Thou art the mother of the indeed
true Life ; thou art the leaven of the re-formation of Adam "
(Horn. 2, in dormit. B. V. init. Bibl. P. Gr. Lat. ii. 459, Paris,
1622), and in another, on the Annunciation, also given to him,
he says, " Hail, holy virgin-earth, from which was the new
Adam, by an ineffable divine formation, that He might
save the old : hail, holy, Divinely-perfect leaven, from which the
whole lump of the human race was re-leavened, and from the
One Body of Christ, the wonderful commingling, being made
Bread, came into one " (Gall. xiii. p. 102). Since, in this case
too, the leaven is the flesh of the B. V., which our Lord took,
it has no bearing on the doctrine of the Immaculate Concep-
tion. Perrone (p. 316) follows the earlier and unamended
text of Combefis, 1644, and prints in capitals H MH $YPA-
, as the text, for ^ Itfyq TrpocfrvpaOtLo-a, and renders
320 Virgin-Birth, not Cone, of herself, spoken of.
Nativity, the writer uses exactly the same image of
the Incarnation, so that no one can doubt it1. In
the first two, he is speaking of the Nativity of the
Blessed Virgin as the preparation for the Incarna-
tion. But in no way can the passage be brought
to bear on the doctrine of the Immaculate Concep-
tion.
The second passage, which Perrone says illus-
trates the comparison in the Epistle of the Church
of Achaia, brings out this, that, in the comparison
with the virgin-earth, of which Adam was made,
the virginity is the prominent idea. The earth of
the garden of Eden yielded its fruits without aid
of man. He calls it " virgin and untouched," in
the same way as Theodotus compares the Blessed
Virgin with the garden of Eden, because it brought
it " tota massa fermentata, EA NON FEBMENTATA, per
ipsam conficitur panis ;" fapaOela-a, too, is " kneaded," not
" leavened." But this does not represent even his own text,
which indeed cannot be grammatically rendered. Combefis
amended the text in 1648 throughout from a MS. of Card.
Mazarin. Gallandi (T. xiii. p. 95) unluckily reprinted the un-
amended text.
1 " * Blessed art thou among women,' the spiritual Beth-
lehem, who, by appointment and by nature, becomest and art
called the spiritual house of * the Bread of life.' For indwell-
ing in thee, in what way He knoweth, and commingled uncon-
fusedly with our lump, He new-leavened the whole Adam with
Himself, that He might become a living and heavenly Bread."
Horn. 2, in Comb. Ib. i. col. 1309, 12. The same words recur,
here TO> ^/Acrepw cru//,<£v|oa0eis d<£v/mos <£upa/x,(m dyc^v/x-axrev — ?va
apros yevr)Tai. Perrone notices that Combefis interpreted the
passage, in the first homily, of our Lord.
Tabernacle of the Great High Priest. 321
forth trees at the simple command of God, through
" the husbandry of God," without layers placed by
man. Both passages speak of her spotlessness ;
but this, according to the context, relates rather to
the time when our Lord was conceived of her 2.
In a third passage, the writer is applying the
types of the Old Testament, and considers the
entrance of the High Priest once in the year into
the holy of holies a type of the Incarnation of
Him Who became thereby our great High Priest.
In so doing, He calls the B. V. " a tabernacle
not formed with hands 3." Human beings are
made, not by a human architect, but by God. If
the language were pressed further, it would prove,
not the Immaculate Conception, but a Conception
like our Lord's, without human agency, by God the
2 " For the Redeemer of our race, willing, as I said, to ex-
hibit a new birth and re-formation of man instead of the former,
as there He moulded the first Adam, having first taken clay
from the virgin and untouched (dve7ra<£ov) earth, so here too,
Himself operating His own Incarnation, instead of other earth,
so to speak, having chosen this pure and exceeding spotless
Virgin out of the whole kind, and having new-made in her our
nature from ourselves, the Moulder of Adam became a new
Adam, that the New, but above all time, might save the old."
Horn. 1 in Nat. S. M., Combefis, Auct. i. 1300.
8 " Hail, tabernacle not formed with hands and formed of
God, into which, once in the end of the world, God the High
Priest first and alone entered, to operate in thee, after a hidden
mystery, the service for all." In Nat. S. MariaB, Combef.
Auct. i. 1324, Paris, 1648, and in the Bibl. Pat. Gr. Lat.,Paris,
1624, ii. 457 as S, Germanus's.
322 S. John Damascene
Holy Ghost, The word " Alone " shows that the
writer was thinking of the perpetual Virginity of
the Blessed Virgin.
In a fourth passage, the writer is contrasting
the B. V. with other saints, of whom relics were
left on earth, and so is speaking of her actual
holiness4; in a fifth, he uses two of the titles
which express exceeding actual holiness, by reason
of the Incarnation; he has no reference to her
own conception 5.
19. Damascene, A.D. 731, when alleging as " a
diviner ground " why the B. V. was born of barren
parents, that "nature waited for grace6," is speak -
4 " But not in like wise hath the Incomprehensible been
apprehended to do as to the all-undefiled Virgin and Mother,
but removing her wholly from death to life, as being loftier
than all sin and defilement, and taking up her soul with her
body to the spiritual and heavenly altar." Encom. in depos.
ZonaB B. M. in Combef. Auct. ii. 791, beg, TIS o <£atS/309 o-vA-
Aoyos.
6 " ' Glorious things are spoken of thee, thou city of God,'
the Divine David sang to us in mystery in the Spirit, again
truly most evidently calling ' the city of the Great King,' of
whom glorious things are spoken, her, I deem most clearly and
irrefutably, who was indeed elected and superior to all, not in
eminence of building nor in height of crested eminences, but
her who was raised above, others by the nobility of her Divine
virtues, eminent in purity, the exceeding pure and exceeding
spotless Mother of God ; in whom He Who is indeed ' King
of kings and Lord of lords ' tabernacled, or rather in whom
the fulness of the Godhead dwelt bodily." in Enccen.
Deip. init. in Combef. Manip. rer. Const, p. 232, beg.
But I can bring another higher and diviner ground [of the
speaks of her miraculous Conception. 323
ing of the miraculous intervention of God, Who,
he believed, gave to the B. V.'s mother, being
barren (as He did to Sarah), power of giving
birth. If the word "grace" were pressed to mean
the Immaculate Conception, it would prove this as
to the body too, that the Conception of the B. V.'s
body, too, was a work of Divine grace, i. e., that
she was conceived of the Holy Ghost. But the
context shows further, that he uses the word
"grace," not in respect to holiness but of the
gracious interference of God, in making one
hitherto barren fruitful. For as the ground why
"nature waited for grace," he subjoins not any
thing as to holiness, but the fitness that she should
be Anne's first-born, who was to be the mother of
the First-born of all creation. " Nature then
waited for grace," in that no child was born of
Joachim and Anne after the way of nature, nor
until, upon prayer, God gave life to the barren
womb of Anne.
The other passage of Damascene expresses only
her exemption from actual sin, and the Virgin-birth
B. Y. being born of one barren]. For nature has yielded to
grace, and stands in suspense, not daring to go further. For
since the Virgin Theotokos was to be born of Anne, nature did
not dare anticipate the scion of grace, but remained unfruitful,
until grace should yield her fruit. For need was, that she
should be born the first-born, who should bear the First-born
of all creation, in whom all things consist." Horn. 1 in Nat.
M. V. Opp. ii. 842, ed. Le Qu.
x 2
324 Council of Frankfort, fyc., speak
of our Lord7. His statement of the later sanctifica-
tion of the B. V. has been given already 8.
20. The writer of a homily, once thought to
be Alcuin's, is of little account9. Yet he also,
equally with the Synodical Epistle of the Council of
Frankfort, A.D. 795, dwells on the actual immacu-
lateness of the B. V. when our Lord was born of
her. Perrone says 10, —
" If the Virgin earth was better than that virgin earth of
which the body of the first Adam was formed, yea was imma-
culate according to the fathers of Frankfort, it is clear that,
according to their mind, she was ever free from stain."
The Bishops of the Council lay stress on the
7 " In this [Eden] the serpent found no stealthy entrance,
desiring whose false deifying, we were likened to the senseless
brutes. For the Only Begotten Son of God Himself, being
God and of the same Substance with the Father, formed Him-
self Man of this virgin and pure field." Horn. ii. in Dormit.
B. V., Opp. ii. 869. He subjoins, " To-day the undefiled Vir-
gin, who had no intercourse with earthly passions, but was
nourished with heavenly thoughts, &c."
8 See ab. p. 148.
9 " And truly didst thou fulfil the office of the dawn. For the
Sun of Righteousness Himself, Who was to come forth from
thee, anticipating His rising by a sort of matin irradiation,
abundantly transfused into thee the rays of His light, whereby
He turned to flight the powers of the darkness which Eve had
brought on. Thou art beautiful as the moon, yea more beau-
tiful than the moon, because thou art wholly beautiful, and
there is no spot in thee nor shadow of turning." Homily on
the Nativity of the B.V. ascribed to Alcuin, in the Bibl. Virgin.
P. Alva, i. 631. Matriti 1648 in Perrone. It is excluded from
critical editions of Alcuin.
10 p. 318.
of the B. VSs actual immaculateness. 325
" animate " as well as the " immaculate V A body,
whose soul is in grace, is far higher than the inani-
mate earth. Present spotlessness does not involve,
of any necessity, spotlessness in the past, much less
the absence of even a temporary subjection to
original sin in the mother's womb. Peter and the
rest of the Apostles were " full of the Holy Ghost"
after the day of Pentecost. This does not imply
that they were so before our Lord's Crucifixion,
when Apostles fled and Peter denied his Lord. No
more does Mary's actual immaculateness, when our
Lord was to be born of her, imply any thing as to
the past.
21. Theodorus, Patriarch of Jerusalem, just before
the 2nd Council of Nice, speaks of her exceeding
dignity by reason of the Incarnation and of her
being created for that dignity, not of her Con-
ception 2.
1 "This too we would hear of you, whether Adam the first
father of the human race, who was created of Virgin earth, was
created free or a servant. If a servant, how was he then the
image of God ? If free, why then was Christ not free, born of
a virgin ? He was made man by operation of the Holy Ghost,
of better earth, even animate and immaculate, as the Apostle
saith : ' The first man was made of the earth, earthy ; the second,
from Heaven, Heavenly.' If we confess that the earthy was
created free, why do we not much more confess the Heavenly
to have been free ? For whence was Adam made a servant, save
from sin ?" Synodical Epistle of Council of Frankfort to the
Eelicians, A.D. 795. Cone. T. ix. 85 ed. Colefc.
2 " Who is truly mother of God, Virgin before and after bear-
ing, created sublimer than the glory and brightness of all nature,
326 George of Nicom. ignorant of 1mm. Cone.
22 — 24. Joseph the hymn- writer, George of
Nicomedia, Peter Chorepiscopus, writers of the
ninth century, whom B. Piazza dwells upon, and
Perrone alludes to, use the same terms which we
have already met with 3, as to her actual holiness,
or that derived from our Lord's Presence in her.
Those in George of Nicomedia relate to her, as
believed to have been presented in the temple when
three years old, and so manifestly do not bear on
her Conception. But, in fact, the titles are such
as had become received titles of the B. V., and are
given to her, irrespective of her actual circum-
stances, as she might then too be called " Theo-
tokos," although the Incarnation, whence she had
the title, followed some years later. It is even
an argument that George of Nicomedia did not
know of the doctrine of the Immaculate Con-
ception, that, dwelling, as he does in three long
sermons, on the Conception of S. Anne, he expa-
tiates on the miracle of the removal of her barren-
ness, on the greatness of the destination of her to
whom she was to give birth, the removal of S.
Anne's barrenness being a forerunner of the greater
miracle of the Virgin-Conception, but he has not
sensible or immaterial." Quoted in the 2nd Council of Nice.
Concil. T. viii. p. 829. Col.
3 In George of Nicomedia I find axpavros Horn, in S. M.
Praesent. (Migne C. p. 1415), d/xoAwros, ao-TriXos (Ib. p. 1418.)
a/w,u)//,og, d/o/Xi'SwTos, a/coti/wi/r^ros TT/S d/xa/mas, TravacrTriAos, pp.
1419 — 1453. Trcu/ayvos, a/atWros, p. 1448.
Geometra misquoted from translation. 327
one word as to the immaculateness of her own Con-
ception, upon which Conception he dwells. ,
25. The writer of the Sermon on the Conception,
some Sophronius, of the same period (as it is sup-
posed), dwells on the fulness of grace in her, her
many virtues of merits by gifts of the Holy Ghost,
and so shows that the immaculateness, of which he
speaks, is an endowment, the fruit of the use of
grace 4.
26. In John Geometra, about A.D. 980, the verse
upon which Perrone insists so much5, belongs to the
4 " For she was whitened and brightened with many virtues of
merits, whiter tKan snow by gifts of the Holy Spirit ; and there-
fore immaculate, because in none corrupt. Although it is
believed that there was grace in the holy fathers, yet it was not
so far full. But upon Mary came the fulness of all grace which
is in Christ, although otherwise. And therefore he says,
* Blessed art thou among women,' i. e. more blessed than all
women. And thereby [viz. through the Incarnation] whatever
curse was infused through Eve, the blessing of Mary took away
the whole." In Opp. S. Hieron. T. xi. p. 96.
5 I give the whole series of couplets (hexameters and penta-
meters), of which Perrone joins the first and the last.
" Hail, O form, framed from above, from the starry heaven,
Drawing nothing of daily evil ;
Hail, O form, tempered hitherto (axpt) undefiled in each
way;
Of beauty aerial, of beauty from this earth ;
Hail, O form, like a chariot of fire, hiding another Sun,
The everliving Lord of the sun ;
Hail, grace, Mother of Wisdom, of Light, of Word, of
Might,
Mother of the Father, daughter of thy Son ;
Hail, delight of God, new chariot of the Allwise,
Where the sun ran its course to our setting ;
328 Fulbert of Chartres,
Latin versifier, who substitutes something of his
Hail, thou pregnant of the welcomed Word, self-produced,
Of the self- engendering light, the primaeval Nature;
Hail, thou who gavest bodily substance to God, and again
Hail, thou who cleansedst from grievous grossness
unto God."
— Hymn 3 in Lectii Poetse Grseci, T. ii. pp. 748, 9. Colon.
1614.
The line, which Perrone prints in capitals, " Gaude, PBIM^VI
LTBERA LABE PATEis," replaces this last line without any au-
thority from the Greek. It relates entirely to the Incarnation,
that the B. V. gave our (so to say) coarse bodily substance
(coarse, because bodily) to God (Traxwa/xei^ Otov) ; on the
other hand, that she refined what was mortal, and so, gross
(apyaXeov Tra^eos) he ventures to call it, so that in our
Lord's Person it was deified. He says, fifteen lines later,
in the like contrast —
" Hail, who mortalizedst (/fyoToxra/xeVi?) God,"
and again, conversely —
" Hail, who Deifiedst (0etoo-a/zeV»7) from thine own blood."
In the Sermon of John Geometra, published by Ballerini
(Syll. Monumm. ii. 142 — 209), I equally find traces only of
actual immaculateness. Such are the passages on which Bal-
lerini insists, " On account of the woman, a woman is elected,
and on account of Eve, life ; on account of the corrupted, a
virgin ; on account of the deceived, one not carried away with
[the rest] ; on account of her who fell from Eden, she who was
brought to the temple ; on account of her who was caught by
pleasure, she who was not defiled even in thought ; on account
of her who held evil whispers with the devil, she who con-
versed with God and meditated on the Divine words" (n. 8,
pp. 153, 154). " O that nature, which was above nature, not
of soul only, but of body too, which also drew down, more than
the holy souls in others, the operation of the Spirit. For in
them scarcely were even the souls, being themselves exceed-
ingly cleansed through the Spirit, a very little irradiated ; but in
her the flesh too became the dwelling-place of the whole Spirit
no tradition as to temporal beginnings of B. V. 329
own, not to Geometra. His testimony, on the con-
trary side, has been already quoted 6.
27. The latest authority cited by Perrone, Ful-
bertus of Chartres, A.D. 1007, begins his sermon by
speaking of athe festival " being " suspected/' extols
it on account of the eminence of the B. V. over the
rest of mankind, praises the holiness of the parents
who gave her birth, speaks of the guardianship of
the holy angels over them during her conception.
All this looks like apology for celebrating a con-
ception, which was after the way of nature, mini-
mizing the " blessed fault," extolling the care, that
there should be as little human about it as possible.
It is not the clear outspoken language of one who
believed the Immaculate Conception, or who spoke
to those who believed it. In regard to the B. V.
herself, he only says, that it is inconceivable that
the Holy Ghost should have been " absent from that
excellent maiden," a phrase which could hardly be
used of one unborn. He praises her for her actual
graces, her " merits," her " chastity." Finally, he
apologizes for the absence of any traditional know-
ledge of " the temporal beginnings of this aforesaid
Virgin," which he supposes to have been concealed,
for fear of some heresy which might arise 7.
and the workshop of the Son, yea rather supplying Him with
the matter itself also and commingled through cleansing"
(Ib. 10, pp. 157, 158).
6 N. 61, p. 154.
7 " For blessed was the fault, but holy the conjugal society,
330 S. Maximus of Turin,
I have reserved to the end those passages about
which I felt a doubt, those of S. Maximus of Turin
and Paschasius Radbertus, as also the question
whether the contrast of the B. V. with Eve in
earlier fathers bears on this doctrine, as Perrone
too thought.
which poured forth in the world such and so great and special
and singular an ornament, from the permitted nuptial inter-
course. In her necessary conception, no doubt that the vivi-
fying and ardent Spirit filled both parents with a singular gift,
and that the guardianship or visitation of the holy angels
never departed from them. Deservedly are the most holy pro-
genitors of this holy Virgin much to be praised and extolled,
who in all their ways showed themselves such, that not un-
deservedly should such a succession come forth from their
stock, which should, to ancient and subsequent ages, be an
example of all goodness. — Truly happy, and to be had in all
veneration, and to be extolled for a certain sacred privilege,
is the mother of this saint, who surpasses the mothers of all
in conceiving and generating Tier, who should generate the
Creator of herself and of all. E/ejoice and be glad, O happy
in such a daughter, since thou wert endowed with such a
dowry. What provision of holy angels was there around
parents, so exceeding acceptable to God, from the begin-
ning of their procreation, and what watching over so great
an offspring ! Is it to be believed that the Holy Spirit was
absent from that excellent maiden, which He was purposing
to overshadow with His power ? No faithful can doubt, that
all the multitude of the heavenly hosts watched around her,
inasmuch as they doubted not that she was to be exalted
above them. O exceedingly above others Blessed Virgin, who
is to be compared to no merit, nor co-equalled in title of
chastity ! Truly blessed were these ages, which deserved to
receive thee in their time from the consecrated womb. Truly
if any, with anxious mind and studious investigation, seek why
the memories of preceding saints did not adorn in detail
" Originali (?) gratia:1 331
28. The one expression of S. Maximus of Turin,
"originali gratia," is obscure. "Virginali" for
" originali " would correspond with the whole con-
text8, both before and afterwards, which relates
to the Virgin-Conception, the unimpairedness of
that virginity by the birth of Jesus, the fitness
that it should be so, since He came to confer the
virginity of Baptism ; the word " originali " comes
in abruptly. Yet even if " originali " be the
reading, it would betoken no more than that she
had grace from her birth, like Jeremiah and St.
John Baptist, which we must all believe. One,
born with grace, would surely be endowed with
the temporal beginnings of this aforesaid Virgin to their
faithful followers, so as to publish them to the knowledge of
all, let them know, that they were not ignorant of the heresy
which would arise, in respect to (pro) the eminent and ad-
mirable panegyric of this sacred maiden, and therefore, if they
put forward any thing of her birth, they decided that it was
to be concealed with sagacious industry from the envious and
unbelievers, lest the blind garrulity of the perfidious should find
materials for scourging the maternal bosom of the Church by
their manifold fallacy." Serm. 6 in ortu alma3 V. M. invio-
late, in Migne, T. cxli. pp. 326, 327.
8 The context is : "A Virgin conceived, ignorant of consort
of man ; the womb is filled, impaired by no embrace, and the
chaste womb received the Holy Ghost, Whom the pure limbs
retained, the innocent body bore. See ye the miracle of the
Mother of the Lord. She is a virgin when she conceives ;
a virgin when she bears ; a virgin after bearing. Glorious
virginity and excellent fruitfulness ! The Virtue of the world
is born, and there are no groans from her who gives birth.
The womb is emptied, the child is received, virginity is unin-
jured. Tor it was meet that, when God is born, the merit
332 Paschasius Radbertus argues in proof
" originalis gratia," in contrast to that " originale
peccatum," with which we come into the world.
29. Paschasius Radbertus9, A.D. 844, seems to have
of chastity should grow, and that integrity should not be
violated by Sis Coming, Who had come to heal what was cor-
rupted; nor should the chastity of body be injured by Him,
through whom the virginity of baptism is bestowed on the un-
chaste. The Child then, when born, is placed in the crib, and
this is the earliest cradle of God ; nor does the King of heaven
disdain this narrow space, Whose dwelling-place had been the
Virgin's womb. Mary was a fitting habitation of Christ, not
for her bodily form, but for original grace [virgin ? grace.] So
then Mary, unburdened of her Blessed Burden, gladly knows
herself a mother, who knew not herself to be a wife; and is
glorious from her Child, who is ignorant of a husband ; and
marvels that she had borne an infant, attesting that she had
received the Holy Ghost ; nor is she terrified because, un-
married, she bore, having the testimony of her virginity
and of the Child. For the Child indicates that His
Father was the Lord ; her virginity is a defence against the
suspicion of the amazed." — Serm. Y. Nat. Dom. p. 18,
Rom. 1784. The idea that " originalis " is an error for " vir-
ginalis," is my son's.
0 " But the Blessed Mary, although she was born and gene-
rated from * flesh of sin,' and although she herself was ' flesh
of sin,' is she not then already, from the praevenient grace of
the Holy Ghost, called by the Angel, ' Blessed above all women?'
* The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the
Highest shall overshadow thee.' Else if she was not sanctified
and cleansed by the same Spirit, how was her flesh not ' flesh
of sin?' And if her flesh came from the mass of the first
transgression, how was Christ the Word Flesh without sin,
Who took Flesh of ' flesh of sin,' save that the Word, which
was made Flesh, first overshadowed her, into whom the Holy
Ghost supervened (in quam — supervenit), and the power of
the Highest wholly possessed her. Wherefore her flesh was
now truly not flesh of sin, in which God infused Himself
of immaculate Nativity of the B. V. 333
held that the B. V. was sanctified in her mother's
womb; but his text, as it now stands, has difficul-
wholly, and the Word, which was made Flesh, came to us
without sin ; "Who, duly, not only did not, when lorn, follow
the law of * vitiated nature, but not even that of our first
original, which women would have, had Eve, the mother of all,
kept the commandment in Paradise. Else how, when the Holy
Spirit filled her, was she not without original sin, whose
glorious Nativity too is proclaimed happy and blessed by all,
in every Catholic Church of Christ ? Tor if it were not blessed
and glorious, nowise would the Festival be celebrated every
where by all. But, because it is celebrated so solemnly, it is
clear from the authority of the Church, that, when she was
born, she was subject to no sins, nor, being sanctified in the
womb, did she bring with her [contraxit] original sin.
Whence, although the day of Jeremiah and Job, viz. the day
of their nativity, is pronounced accursed " [rather, they them-
selves cursed it. Job iii. 3, sqq. Jer. xx. 14, sqq. The refer-
ence to Jeremiah is, moreover, inconsistent, since Jeremiah
was sanctified in his mother's womb (Jer. i. 5)], " yet the day
when the happy Nativity of Mary was begun is pronounced
blessed, and is celebrated religiously enough. But had it been
in sin, it might be rightly called cursed and lamentable rather
than blessed, when it was announced to her father that she
was born in the world. But now, because the B. V. M. by
her Blessing illumines the Universal Church, it is not unde-
servedly celebrated as venerable, sanctified in the Holy Spirit.
For the Nativity of no one is celebrated in the world except
Christ's, and hers, and the blessed John's ; John's, because he
too is read to have been sanctified in the womb. So also the
B. V., unless she had been sanctified in her mother's womb,
her Nativity would in no wise be celebrated. But now, because
on the authority of the whole Church it is venerated, it is
known that it was clear of all original sin, through which not
only was the curse of mother Eve dissolved, but also blessing was
bestowed on us all. But if the illustrious Nativity of the most
* Feu-Ardent's MS. in the Bib. Pat. had " invitiatse."
334 Paschasiw Radbertus; the B.V's flesh,
ties to all. De Bandelis l and Petau 2 quote him,
under the name of S. Ildephonso, as holding the
sacred Virgin is, universally, rightly so observed and venerated,
as so holy and glorious, how much more herself, when she is
saluted so respectfully by the Angel as being now ' full of
grace.' For when he says to her ' Hail,' he shows to her the
heavenly respect of veneration. But when he sayg, ' full of
grace,' he both shows that wrath is entirely shut out, and grace
restored. When he says, 'Blessed art thou,' he shows the
fruit of benediction, that, when the Holy Spirit came into her,
He cleansed and refined the whole Virgin from defilement, so
that she should be holier than the stars of heaven." — Bibl.
Patr. xii. 566, published there as S. Ildephonso's. I have
used in my translation the better text in the works of S. Ilde-
phonso (Collectio SS. PP. Toletanorum, t. i. p. 298, sq.), where
the editors hold it to be probably Paschasius's.
In the sequel, which Perrone cites, Paschasius had been
dwelling at great length, and in great nakedness of language,
upon her sacred child-bearing, and the absence of any effect
upon her bodily frame, and apologizes for so doing. " But it
is the honour of excellent reverence, and the glory of virtue to
extol to you the chastity of the most Blessed Virgin, and to
confess that it was alien from all contagion of our first origin "
(Ib. p. 567, col. 2, in SS. Patr. Tol. i. 303). These last words,
which Perrone prints in capitals, "ET AB OMNI CONTAGIONE
PBIMLE OEIGUNIS CONPITEEI ALiENAM," relate not to the B. V.
herself simply, but to her "pudicitia," and mean that this
virgin Birth from her was free from all those effects of child-
bearing which follow upon conception in the way of nature.
1 Pp. 47 and 163, examining Leonard de Nogaroli's Office
for her Conception. De B. observes that the argument
"unless she had been sanctified in her mother's womb, her
Nativity would not be celebrated " would be faulty, if " sanc-
tified " were made to refer to her Conception, " because John
Baptist was not so sanctified, and yet his Nativity is cele-
brated." P. 164.
2 De Incarn. 14. 2. 5.
"flesh of sin" her Nativity holy. 335
sanctification in her mother's womb, after the con-
ception in original sin ; Perrone would have it, that
he held the Immaculate Conception 3. The context
of the passage, and its similarity to other passages,
leave me no doubt, that he held that her flesh,
equally with that of those before her, was " flesh of
sin ;" he has the same difficulty as so many others,
how our Lord's flesh, being derived from hers,
could be other than " flesh of sin ;" he meets this
in the same way, that hers was cleansed by the
overshadowing of the Holy Ghost before the Incar-
nation. In consequence of this overshadowing, he
says, that her flesh was no longer "flesh of sin."
According to this (which is Augustinian language),
her flesh, which was " flesh of sin " before, ceased
to be such through the overshadowing of the Holy
Ghost, which the Angel announced to her, just
before the Incarnation. As, in any case, the guilt
of original sin had long since been remitted to her,
this relates, I suppose, to the material effects of
original sin upon the frame, the " fomes peccati."
Paschasius then goes on to the argument from the
celebration of the Nativity of the B. V. to the
belief of her sanctification in her mother's womb,
but only equally with S. John Baptist. All which
he says in this respect might be said equally of S.
John Baptist ; and Perrone's expedient, that he is
speaking of what some Schoolmen spoke of, the
3 P. 98, note.
336 Pasch.R. speaks of holiness of the Nativ. only.
Nativity in the womb, i.e. the infusion of the soul,
is absolutely excluded by the parallel of the celebra-
tion of her Nativity with that of S. John Baptist,
which he, in common with others, employs. Since
his Nativity, which was celebrated, was his actual
birth into the world, as was also that of our Lord,
there can be no doubt that such was the Nativity
of the B.V., which he compares with theirs. It is
equally impossible, to take so positive a statement,
that hers was " flesh of sin," to mean (according
to an expedient of others, which Perrone alike
approves) that hers was liable to be such. Nor
would one who believed her Conception to have
been immaculate, have argued back from the cele-
bration of her Nativity, since this proved only what
had been equally bestowed on S. John Baptist,
with whose Nativity he compares hers. Further,
Paschasius himself lays the stress upon the free-
dom of the B. V. from sin at her birth ; " she
was subject to no sins, when she was born." I
think, then, that it is the least difficulty to under-
stand the words, not in the technical sense which
" contraxit " had, " contracted original sin," but
(as De B. does) of " carrying it with " her. This
alone gives the natural sense also to the words,
" nor did she, being sanctified in the womb." For
they presuppose that she was already there (not
her body only, but her soul) when she was sanc-
tified.
Bailer in i adds to these passages of Perrone
Latin authorities in Ballerini. 337
three Latin authorities: — 1) the Charta of dona-
tion of Ugo de Summo to the " Church of S.
Mary Mother4,'' with a date " A.D. 1047, on the
Feast of Holy and Immaculate Conception of the
B. V. M. ;" 2) A " trope 5," " on a small parchment,
sewn on to the above charta 6," saluting the B. V.
as "conceived without stain;" and 3) a hymn,
found in MSS. of the Breviary, formerly used by
the Monks of Monte-Casino, at the Festival of the
Assumption. Two of these MSS. belong to the
close of the 9th, or the beginning of the 10th
century 7. In one of them, a St. Germain MS.,
the hymn is ascribed to S. Ambrose 8.
1) What may be the origin or history of this
Charta of Ugo, I know not. But the language of
Sicardus, who was, for 30 years, Bishop of
Cremona, from 1185 — 1215 9, is absolutely irre-
concilable with the date which it bears. Words
of Muratori have been quoted, that Sicardus was
"not at home, even as to domestic matters1."
4 Syll. Monum. i. 11—23.
5 Ib. pp. 23-25. 6 Ib. p. 3. 7 Ib. p. 27. 8 Ib. p. 29.
* He says that he was elected Bishop A.D. 1185, Chron.,
quoted by Muratori, Rerr. Ital. Scr. T. vii. p. 526, who says
that he died A.D. 1215. Ib. p. 525.
1 " Domi suss hospitem se prodit." Sicardi made a Luyso
Bishop of Cremona under Otho I. (died A.D. 973), distinct
from Luitprand under Otho II., being the same. But Mura-
tori adds, " whence you may understand, how easily historians
slipped in those rude ages, in matters remote from their own
age, when contemporary authors failed them. But," he adds,
" what I have hitherto adduced, no way hinders that the work
Y
338 " Charta of Ugo " later than 13th cent.
Muratori was speaking, not of any ignorance of
Sicardus as to events of his own time, but of a
mistake which he made as to an event two
centuries before him. He was speaking expressly
of the " liability to mistake, in those rude ages,
in matters remote from their own age" and that,
in the absence of contemporary authority. But
Muratori speaks in the same place of the value
of the authority of Sicardus for his own time.
This lies in the very nature of things. It is not
uncommon that annalists who are unreliable
or uncertain authorities for times at a distance
from their own, are yet most perfectly accurate
when they are speaking of their own. Every one
acknowledges the extreme value of contemporary
statements. But, in regard to the Feast of the
Conception, they are of his own times that Sicardus
is speaking. " Some at one time celebrated the
Conception of the B.V., and perchance still cele-
brate it," is language wholly irreconcilable with
its having been celebrated for the last century and
a half in the city of which Sicardus, " 2 a man of
distinguished piety," was for 30 years a Bishop.
The Charta then must at least be subsequent to
the death of Sicardus, at the beginning of the
13th century, even if his successor introduced the
of Sicard, added to others older, may contribute supports of
its own to learning, and chiefly when he relates what was done
in his own times, or those a little before." — P. 527.
2 See above, p. 194.
" Trope " contemporary with the Cliarta. 339
Festival, and that, not only as the Feast of the
Conception, but as " the Feast of the Immaculate
Conception," of which we know nothing. We only
know that it cannot be a genuine document.
2) The " Trope " bears no date. It is probably
of the same date as the Charta. For the Charta
directs a Trope to be sung " yearly on the Feast of
the Immaculate Conception of the B. Mary,
Mother of God ;" and the sewing this Trope on
the Charta implies that this Trope was that chosen,
at some time, to be sung. But since the date of
the Charta is uncertain and must be late, so must
be that of the " trope 3."
3) The hymn is of a different measure from
that of the twelve which the Benedictines ac-
knowledge as S. Ambrose's 4, and of any other
attributed to him ; and a metrical licence occurs
twice 5, which implies a change in the principles
8 " Tropes " are spoken of, in a life of S. Notker, as " com-
posed by his companions and brothers in the monastery of
St. Gall," i.e. at the end of the 9th or the beginning of the
10th century (Ballerini, Syll. Diss. T. i. p. 22, quoting Du
Cange, Gloss, v. Tropus.). So that there is nothing to pre-
clude its being of whatever age the Charta may belong to.
4 S. Ambrose's hymns are all in Dimeter Iambic ; this
metre consists of the repetition of the two first lines of an
Alcaic. This is not an accidental difference. The Dimeter
Iambic — our "long measure" (as far as in our heavy con-
sonantal language we can imitate it) — is a stately measure ;
this adaptation of part of the Alcaic, in which each verse ends
with two dactyles, is a very tripping one.
6 " Beddita vita est," v. 4, " ortus in orbe eat," v. 22, as
Y 2
340 Hymn not S.Ambrose's; of her Cone, of Jesus.
of rhythm, since S. Ambrose's time. The measure,
also, is itself very rare, and is an adaptation of
part of an old classical measure, probably devised
by Prudentius 6, who began writing sacred poetry
after the decease of S. Ambrose. But the only
expression which can be quoted as bearing on the
subject, — God, " seeing the womb of the Virgin,
ignorant of guilt," — must relate to that which is
the subject of the whole context 7, the " Virginity."
The writer had used the same poetic but unusual
word, of the virginity, five lines before, " the un-
married womb," lit. bowel. On any other ground
dactyles. S. Ambrose in this respect adheres to the old rules.
The omission of the elision is one of the marks of a later
date. A similar omission in Iambic verse " caeli fenestra facta
es" occurs in a hymn, ascribed indeed by Card. Thomasi
(Opp. ii. 304) to Venantius Eortunatus, " 0 gloriosa femina,"
but which is not in the MSS. of his collective works. Card.
Thomasi follows in other places the authority of a single MS.,
and is corrected by subsequent writers.
6 Prudentius' hymn on S. Agnes (Perist. Hymn, xiv.) is
written in this measure ; Ennodius Bp. of Ticino (A.D. 511)
wrote in it a hymn on S Euphemia (B. P. ix. 424). Daniel in
his Thes. Hymn, has only one instance of the like measure
(T. i. p. 100). Mone, in his 1215 hymns (including Troparia
and Sequences), has, I think, only one more, which its
rhymes show to be late.— N. 573, T. ii. p. 386.
7 " Inscia Cernens piacli viscera Virginis," vv. 13, 14 ;
" Virgo puerpera," v. 5 ; " hortus superno germine consitus,"
v. 6 ; " signatus fons sacer," v. 7 ; " viscere ccelibi," v. 8 ;
" innubse-Virgini," vv. 17, 18 ; " Intacta Mater," v. 21 ; " virgi-
nalis vincula permanent — pudoris," vv. 25, 26. So also vv,
27—32.
Turning-point of Ball.1 s Greek citations. 341
the emphasis laid on the " guiltless womb " would
be inexplicable. No one would speak of a "guilt-
less womb " to express a " sinless being ;" and even
then it would not imply her own immaculate Con-
ception.
The force of the extracts from the Greek
writers published by Ballerini, from John, Bishop
of Euboea, A.D. 744, to Isidore of Thessalonica,
A.D. 1400 ( Antipater 8, Sophronius 9, and even
Isidore of Thessalonica *, go the other way), seems
to me to turn upon three points: — 1) the use,
sometimes accumulated, of those words which
Petau held to have been misleading, axpavros,
TraLvd^pavTo^, &c. ; 2) the question, whether the
use of those titles of the Blessed Virgin by any
writer when speaking of her Conception, implies
that he means that her Conception itself was
Immaculate ; 3) whether, when a writer spoke of
the presence or co-operation of the Holy Spirit at
the time of the " active conception " of the B.V.,
he thought that it not only hallowed the parents,
and, through their sanctification, in some measure
worked upon the natural qualities of the child, or
whether he held that the Holy Spirit was given
also to the child itself.
On the first question, I cannot but prefer the
judgment of Petau. But neither can I think that
8 See ab. p. 126. Ab. pp. 145, 146.
1 See below, pp. 349, 350.
342 "All-undefiled" #c., like " Theotokos," titles
any dogmatic inference can be derived from the
passages under the second head ; and that, both
because words relating to the Incarnation, and so
necessarily to a later period of life in grace, are
joined with the words which imply immaculateness,
and also on the ground of the use of language
generally. It was believed of her, that she alone
among women was ever exempt from all actual
sin ; and hence those titles Travd^pavTo^ &c., became
a sort of proper name belonging to her. As she
alone was Theotokos, so she alone was " all-un-
defiled," &c., in regard to all actual sin. When,
then, one speaks of " the generation of the all-
undefiled and God-bearing Mary 2," since the 2nd
title " Theotokos " relates to her living being in
this world, so also, I think, does the " all-undefiled."
It is not " the all-undefiled generation of the
Mother of God," but " the generation of her, the
all-undefiled and Theotokos." Western writers have
not hesitated to call herself " Immaculate," who did
not believe her Conception to have been such.
What else could any one call her, believing her to
have been, during her life, sinless, unstained by
sin ? u The all-undefiled maiden," was as much
a title of the Blessed Virgin as the " Theoto-
kos."
2 TT}? Trava^pavro-v KOL OCOTOKOV Maptas, Job. Eub. n. 10. Ball,
i. 68. T^S Trai/a/zw/xov Koprys KCU OCOTOKOV, Ib. n. 14. Ib. p. 76.
I observed other instances.
of B. V. apart from time, as are other titles. 343
I need not repeat what I said before, that the
greatest terms seem to be given to the Blessed
Virgin, because she was the Mother of God. God
had dwelt within her, as He had dwelt in no
created being. The Sun of Righteousness had
hidden His rays, but had dwelt in her sacred
womb. They speak of her as what she became.
So we do in all language. We might say, " On
this day, the great philosopher, Sir Isaac Newton,
was born ;" but he was no philosopher when born,
nor had he any title. In like way, when the Con-
ception of S. John Baptist is mentioned in the
Menologies as " The Conception of the holy Eliza-
beth, when she conceived the holy John, the
Baptist," they do not mean that he was holy when
conceived, but that he was conceived, who became
so great a saint and " the Baptist." John of
Euboea speaks of the " last and great day of the
feast, on which the All-holy Spirit came down
upon the holy disciples and Apostles of our Lord
Jesus Christ." But it was that descent of the
Holy Ghost which filled them with Himself, and
made them " the holy Apostles." So it is plain
that, when S. Andrew of Crete says to God,
" 3 Thou hast given them" [Anne and Joachim] " a
fruit which bearilA Thee, pure," he speaks of what
was then future as being, because it was absolutely
3 Hymn. i. Od. i. n. 2 in Hymnol. de Imra. Deip. Cone,
e codd. Cryptoferr., p. 5, Kom. 1862.
344 Titles at the Conception do not therefore
certain. So again, when he says, " 4 the God-filled
pair of the holy ones produces as a fruit the
venerable mother of the Lord ;" " 4 Anne, escaping
now the reproach of barrenness, containeth the
spacious place of God " [i. e. where He should
dwell] ; or " 5 how is she contained in the womb,
who contained God! how is she produced, who
produced Christ in the flesh ! " or " 6 thou bearest
her who bare the true Lawgiver;" or " 7 the
Conception of the pure, the undefiled virgin and the
only Theotokos being announced ;" or " 8 from thy
(Joachim's) thigh the all-holy throne of Christ is
prepared." Indeed, when it had once become the
custom to give those additional titles, " the all-
undefiled," and the like, to the Blessed Deipara, as
it had before the Feast of the Conception was
instituted, it would seem unnatural not to use
them whenever or however she was mentioned.
I have observed, that the title " pure " or "chaste 9"
4 Hymn. i. Od. ii. n. 1, p. 7, as in Andr. Cret. Or. in Annunc.
Deip. p. 18, quoted Ib.
£ Ib. Od. vi. n. 1, p. 16.
6 Ib. Od. iii. n. 3, p. 10.
7 Hymn. iii. Od. v. n. 3, p. 49.
8 Hymn. iv. Od. v. n. 2, p. 70.
9 " Born from an all-chaste virgin," Sophronius in Mai
Spicil. iv. 54 (Hymnol. p. 8) ; " the all-chaste mother of God,"
Nicephorus Apol. Ib. p. 12, " the chaste mother of God,"
Ode iii. p. 9. Mai Nov. Bibl. v. 68. S. Nilus, N. Cryptof.
in Can. S. Bened. Od. 5. " To bear and preserve the womb
chaste (dyvr)v) was not shown to any but thee, O engraced
of God," Hymnol. p. 12, note 4. I see that Combefis ob-
belong to it. Mysteries of human birth. 345
or " all-pure " is given to her especially in reference
to the Virgin-Birth.
The 3rd question goes deep into the natural
mysteries of human re-production. The relation
of the parents to the natural mental qualities of
the child is so acknowledged as to have become
proverbial, even among the heathen, " Fortes
creantur fortibus et bonis." There is a yet deeper
mystery when this is contravened, and from good
parents a child is born, not in original sin only
(as we all are), but with natural qualities, of sen-
suality or others, more than usually predominant.
Without entering into a province which God
alone knows, this has, at least, been in some
degree ascertained : " animi affectus in parentibus,
quo tempore liberis operam dant, liberorum hide
genitorum ingenia plurimum, sive in bonam, sive
in malam partem afficere." Of course, I am speak-
ing only of natural qualities, — still, natural quali-
ties, good or bad. Some of the schoolmen
dwelt on the fact, that the act on the part of the
parents might be an act, not only blameless but to
the glory of God, if fulfilled with a view to His
glory. Still, they stated that conception was not
served the same reference in the words ayvr), Trdvayvos, vTre/oayi/os
(in Ballerini, who disapproves of it, Syll. ii. 387), add Ode i.
n. 3, p. 6, Ode 5, Theot. p. 15. Hymn. ii. Ode i. 1, p. 27.
Ode 3, n. 3, p. 29; Ode 5, n. 1, p. 31. Hymn. iv. Od. vi.
Theot. p. 71 ; Hymn. v. Od. 5, Theot. p. 87 ; " in thy Concep-
tion, O pure bride of God," Ib. n. 1, p. 86 ; " all-pure bride,
blessed mother," S. Joh. Damasc. Ib. p. 87, note.
346 Immaculateness of parents of the B. V.
without concupiscentia, " non parentum, sed na-
ture *." That extreme purity, which there doubt-
less was, could only have been by Divine grace
present with her parents then, and had, we must
believe, an effect upon the framing of that sacred
tabernacle, wherein God purposed to vouchsafe to
dwell. But this would not preclude the trans-
mission of original sin ; else in the case of other
pious parents, who desired only that the fruit of
marriage, if given by God, should be to the glory
1 This is expressed in the Oration of Tarasius on the Pre-
sentation of the B. V., n. 5, where he applies to the Conception
of the B.V. what S. John says of all natural birth, "the
barren womb of Anna was made fruitful, ' of the will
of the flesh and of the will of man.' " Ballerini suspects
the negative to have dropped out, partly on the ground that
the common opinion of the ancients requires this, that, in
the conception of the Virgin, " omnem carnis concupiscentiam
a genitoribus abfuisse " (Syll. Diss. i. 348). But the alternative
of " the birth of the will of the flesh and of the will of man,"
in S. John, is " of God," i. e. of the Holy Spirit. To have
denied that she was "born of the will of man," would have
been to assert that she, like her Son, was " conceived of the
Holy Ghost," without the operation of man. In a paper in the
Analecta Juris Pontificii (Livraison 75, n. 33, col. 31) which,
I am informed, is quasi-authoritative, and which strongly dis-
courages the circulation of unauthorized private revelations, it is
stated that about 1677 " the Cite Mystique of Marie d'Agreda
affirms, among other things, that concupiscence and ' la delecta-
tion charnelle' had no part in the Conception of the B.V. The
ancient tradition of the Church contradicting this opinion,
Innocent XI. condemned it," " though," the article subjoins,
" one cannot rigorously maintain that it is theologically
erroneous."
not held to exempt her from original sin. 347
of God, original sin would not be transmitted.
The immaculateness of the parents, as sanctified
by the Holy Ghost, upon prayer, may doubtless be
to the gain of the child, but it would not effect
this, that the child also should be conceived im-
maculate. This is probably the explanation of the
saying of John of Euboea, in which he speaks of
the co-operation of God the Holy Ghost at the
Conception of the B.Y., since He is present at
all actions which are done holily, seeing they are
done holily only through His co-operation.
"2If the dedications of Churches are rightly celebrated,
how ten thousand times more ought we to celebrate this
festival, with earnestness, piety, and the fear of God, in which
not a foundation was laid of stones, nor from the hands of
men was the temple of God builded, i. e. the Holy Mary, the
Theotokos, was conceived in the womb ; but, by the good
pleasure of the Father, and the co-operation of the All-holy
and life-giving Spirit, Christ the Son of God, the head Corner-
stone, Himself built and Himself dwelt in her, that He might
fulfil the law and the prophets, coming to save us."
Peter of Argos in like way insists on the moral
necessity of the greater excellence of the parents of
her who was to " bear God."
" 3 By how much their child incomparably surpassed all other
children, by so much are these [Joachim and Anne] shown to
be superior to all parents. For since we were compassionated
2 Orat. in Concept. S. Deip., or, in laetum nuncium sanc-
torum justorum, Joachim et AnnaB, et in Nativitatem sacro-
sanctaB Mariae Deip. fin. in Syll. Mon. i. 103, 104.
8 In Concept. Deip. n. 9, Bailer. Syll. i. 136.
348 Excellence of parents of B. V.
by the Incarnation of God, having been condemned to death
and corruption on account of sin, but need was that she who
ministered to so mighty a thing should be better as to purity
than all men, as being to be (oh, marvel !) the mother of God,
need was that the parents too of this Theotokos should be
better than the rest, as being the grandparents of God, "Who
was to be born of her. For it was not right that they should
be the parents of any other than of her, or that she should
be named the daughter of others than they."
And James the Monk, at the close of the llth
century4 :—
" 5 Such were the gains and the deeds of the righteous
(Joachim and Anne); such the bright characters of their
virtues, who inflashed the noble beauty of soul brighter than
those who had appeared before them. For need was that
that incomparable gift among those begotten should proceed
from a supereminent election ; need was that that hyper-holy
wealth should weigh down from abundant virtues ; need was
that such a fruit should be gathered from such pains, that from
a noble root should the noblest germ be put forth ; that from
good loins should that best foetus be yielded, the ever-green
ornament of the race, the most beauteous germ of the nature,
the upstretching stem of the mystery, from which the Flower
of immortality ascending diffused the eternal sweetness, whose
Fruit is made life and iucorruption and abidingness to all who
partake of it." "How blessed the election, most blessed
their distinction in virtues, through which the election came
to them ; for this it was vouchsafed to them to produce the
Queen of all, as the fruit of piety and strength. For need was
that from royal plantations shouldest thou be yielded, the royal
scion : need was that from abundant virtues shouldest thou,
the abundant wealth of good things, be poured out ; need was
4 Ball. ib. i. 161—163.
6 Orat. in Cone. Sanct. Deip. n. 14. Ib. 192—194.
mitigated, not removed, conception in sin. 349
that thou shouldest be the daughter of such parents, and that
they should be the parents of such a daughter. Eor as thou
wast fore-elected before all creation to be mother of God, so
was it vouchsafed to them to be preferred to all parents. How
more than glorious then is the magnificence of Providence ! how
more desirable than all objects of desire the excellent things
which came through thee ! "
But that this excellence of the parents, and the
religiousness of their act did not prevent the trans-
mission of original sin, is brought out the more by
a very late writer, Isidore of Thessalonica, A.D.
1400, who appears to have read and used Peter of
Argos. For, using the language of Peter as to
the congruity of the parents and child, he still
admits (to deny which were heresy) that the
sanctified dispositions of the parents did not
exempt the child from the prophetic saying, " In
sin did my mother conceive me." For in that he
says, " it did so, as far as was possible" he shows
his belief that it did not altogether 6. The passage
is,—
" r It was meet that neither should they [Joachim and Anne]
who had become so noble in soul, who had so advanced to the
height of righteousness, who had so preferred God to every thing
6 Ballerini (by one of those slips to which we are all liable),
rendered u>s otoi/ re ty, " quemadmodum consentaneum erat,"
instead of " as far as was possible," thus giving the passage
exactly the opposite to its real meaning. Syll. Diss. i. 434.
Ballerini frequently refers to Isidore's supposed" belief as to the
exemption of the B. V., as ii. 387, 393, 396, 413.
7 Serm. in praesent. Deip. n. 13. Syll. Monn. i. 443 — 445.
350 Isidore Thess., B. V. exempt as far as possible.
under heaven, so God-enlightened in mind, be the parents of
any other than her [the B.V.], nor that the blessed one, whose
venerableness my speech omits, being unable to express, should
be the daughter of others than these. Moreover [it was meet
that] neither of that intercourse which was the cause of con-
ception to the Virgin, should any thing else be the first cause
and leading impulse than the intercourse with God; that,
as far as was possible, the all-pure one might be able alone both
to escape that prophetic saying, and to say of herself, ' I was
not conceived in iniquities, not in sins did my mother conceive
me alone,' this, too, being comprehended in that list of the
great things which the Mighty did for me. But this the
parents showed from what they did, coming down from what
intercourse from God, they came together to that intercourse,
the cause of child-producing. Excellently then did this too,
being well, concur in the circle of the wonderful things
about her."
In another place, Isidore speaks of the body of
the B.V. as " a vessel of clay, broken by the fall ;"
which he contrasts with her soul in its mature
graces at the time of the Annunciation.
"8As to the body then, when she considered it as of the
things below and of clay, and the produce of that father who
transgressed, she thought that lofty message fearful, and was
wholly full of amazement, how a vessel of clay, and such as the
fall brake, should contain within, such an One, the Uncontain-
able; and her musing was altogether from that thought; but
when she considered her soul, how she had kept it unspotted,
hyper-pure, how she surpassed every wing, flying by the lofty
ascent of her heart to the heavenly heights, she allowed the
amazement to give way, and yielded undisturbed to the indica-
tion, and cried out, ' Behold the handmaid of the Lord, be it
unto me according to thy word.' "
8 In Deip. Annunt. n. 14. Ib. ii. 413, 414.
Feast of the Cone., no proof of Imm. Cone. 351
III. Perrone follows the Scotists in making the
Festival of the Conception of the B.V. to be in
itself a proof of the Church's belief in its im-
maculateness, upon a narrow application of the
principle that the Church keeps no festival except
in reference to holiness. For 1) the Conception
of the B. V., the Mother of our Lord, would have
a reference to holiness, even though she, like others
conceived as she was, was conceived in original
sin, which original sin (as in S. John Baptist and
Jeremiah) was to be purged away before her birth.
2) The conception of Anne by Joachim was, ac-
cording to all, believed to be altogether holy on
their part, being, as the story stated, upon prayer
and in obedience to the command of God.
The festival of the Conception of the B.V.
certainly had, in its beginnings, no reference to its
immaculateness. I do not, of course, mean to
assume that they who first celebrated it did not
believe it to be immaculate (for this would be to
beg the question). I only mean, that it was cele-
brated on grounds wholly distinct from its im-
maculateness ; and that, if the immaculateness
had been the ground of the celebration, it would
have been the immaculateness of the active, more
prominently than of the passive, conception. It
was the Conception itself as a whole, which was
celebrated ; but the belief as to the history of that
Conception brought the active conception into
prominence.
352 Conception celebrated as thejirst beginning
The Greeks had not the distinction of active
and passive conception, which we find adopted
among the Latins from the Physical philosophers 9.
S. Gregory of Nyssa rejected alike the priority of
soul or body, and held that the being of both was
received contemporaneously ]. Nor is there, I
believe, any trace of any other opinion among the
Greeks. The Greeks, in a most marked way, ex-
press that what they celebrate is (what one would
naturally imagine to have been the occasion of that
Festival) the first beginning of her being, who was to
9 Cassiodorus mentions two opinions, both of which seem to
involve some interval of time. " We read in the creation, that
as soon as the body was formed of the dust of the earth, the
Lord forthwith breathed into it, and that Adam was made a
living soul. Some, following this, said, that as soon as the
human seed was coagulated into a vital substance, forthwith
created souls, distinct and perfect, are given to the bodies.
But those skilled in medicine say, that the human and mortal
animal receives the soul on the 40th day, when it begins to
move itself in its mother's womb." De Anima, c. 7. Opp.
pp. 632, 633. Peter Lombard recognizes the distinction, as
urged by persons who denied the transmission of original sin.
" In the conception itself, where sin is said to be trans-
mitted, the flesh is propagated, and yet, according to the phy-
sicists, the soul is not then infused, but when the body
has received its lineaments." ii. d. 31. This the objectors
rested upon an inference from a mistranslation of Exod. xxi.
22, 23, in the old Latin Version (see in S. Aug. Qu. 86 in Exod.
Opp. iii. i. 448), which was corrected in the Yulg. The dis-
tinction is formally recognized in Innocent III.
1 De anima et resurr. T. ii. pp. 673, 674. S. Basil accounts
abortion, whether before or after formation, murder. Ep. 188,
can, 2, T. iii. p. 271. A.B.
of the being of the Mother of the Redeemer. 353
be the Mother of the Saviour of the world. This
was the more marked among the Greeks, because
they received at that time too the legend of Joachim's
childlessness and Anne's barrenness, and that
Mary was promised by an Angel to them when
bearing reproach for their childlessness, and pray-
ing apart for a child which they promised to God,
being themselves in advanced age, and dead in
body. The Greeks then celebrated at once the
miracle wrought on S. Anne, and the conception
of the Mother of our Redeemer. S. Anne's
miraculous release from barrenness naturally was
looked on as a sort of prelude to the Birth, wholly
above nature, of our Lord. The festival was at
once, " the Conception of S. Anne," and the
" Conception of the Blessed Deipara,"
We find this in the earliest authority quoted by
Perron e, in proof of the early date of the festival
of the Conception of the B.V. It assigns just the
ground which one naturally imagined to have been
the occasion of that festival, and that which S.
Bonaventura mentions, viz., that it was the first
beginning of her being, who was to be the Mother
of the Saviour of the world.
" 2 0 religious Anne, to-day we celebrate thy conception,
that, freed from the bonds of barrenness, thou conceivedst her
in the womb, who contained Him, the Uncontainable."
a Ode, ascribed to S. Andrew of Crete. Bibl. Patr. T. x.
z
354 F. of Conception of the B. V. kept
The same two subjects run through the other
four hymns belonging to the 9th or 1 Oth century,
lately published 3. What, in the later West, is
called the active Conception, is mentioned in pre-
cise physical terms 4. They occur in all the sorts
of shorter hymns in use in the Greek Church 5.
In like way, as to the Greek sermons on the
festival of the Conception. A large proportion of
the sermon is given to the legend of Joachim and
Anne, and their release from barrenness ; so that
there can be no question, but that the Conception
celebrated is that of the B. V. in the hitherto
barren womb ; the joy of the festival is, of course,
that it was the pledge and prelude of the Birth of
our Redeemer.
p. 685. Opp. p. 252,ed. Combef. If his, this would place the fes-
tival about the 6th General Council, which he survived. John
of Eubcea (about AD. 744) speaks of the festival " as not known
to all" (Orat. n. 23, Ball. Syll. i. 102). George of Nico-
media, two centuries afterwards, speaks of it " not, as of later
date, ad-invented, but as being connumerate with the dis-
tinguished feasts," in Combefis Auct. i. 1016.
3 De Imraac. Deip. Cone. Hymnol. Gra3C. Eom. 1862. Chiefly
in the three first, pp. 27 — 78 ; but in that of the vigil too, the
conception contrary to hope is mentioned, pp. 82. 90; the barren-
ness, pp. 84. 91. 92.
4 Pp. 36. 62. 63. 68. 69. 77.
5 Stich. 3. 5. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 15. 16. 18. 19. 20. 22.
23. 25. 26. Suntoma, 2. 6. 8. 10. 11. Kath. 1. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.
Cond. 1. 2. 3. 4. Exap. 2. 3. Trop. 1. 2. 4. The raira-
culousness of the Conception in S. Joh. Damasc. in Deip.
Nativ. Orat. i. n. 2, p. 842, " the strange and unexpected con-
ception," Jacob. Monach. Combef. Auct. i. 1248.
as of the Mother of God, our Redeemer. 355
And in like way, in a discourse attributed to
George of Nicomedia, A.D. 886 : —
" 6 Since to-day's festival is, by reason of the wonders
accomplished in it, a forerunner to all the more illustrious
festivals, and, underlying them as a sort of foundation and
basis, gathers together under itself the whole of the mysteries
which were diversely dispensed, it is meet that we should
hallow to it reverence and joy, as the beginning and cause of
all good."
He speaks of the " 7 unhoped for conception of
her, who, in a new way, worked the supernatural
and unspeakable Conception."
John, Bishop of Euboea, assigns as the ground
of the joy of the festival, that the ark which was
to receive God was formed on that day.
" 8 This is the beginning of the new covenant, of the new and
Grod-receiving (OcoSoxov) ark, formed in the womb of Anne, of
the root of Judah, Jesse and David. For the prophet says,
* I will raise up the tabernacle of David which was fallen down,
and will build up its ruins.' So the tabernacle of David is
raised up in the conception and procreation of his daughter ;
for she it is, of whom first of all, Jacob, prophesying, blessed
Judah thus, c Judah, thy brethren have praised thee.' Truly
happy are ye, Joachim and Anne, for ye are from Judah and
Jesse and David, and she is from you, and from her is the
Lawgiver, and Lord of the prophets, and in the last times the
fulfiller of the law, Christ the Lord."
Peter, Bishop of Argos, of the 9th century (as it
8 Bibl. Patr. xii. 695, col. 2 ; Greek in Combefis, Nov. Auct.
T. i. p. 1018.
7 Orat. 3. Combef. Auct. i. 1064.
8 Orat. in Cone. Deip. n. xi. in Ballerini Syll. Monum.
T. i. pp. 71, 72.
z2
356 F. of Conception of the B. V. kept
is supposed), sets forth the Festival, as the " indi-
cations of our reconciliation with God," the con-
ception of her who will become the cause of all our
joys, through the Incarnation.
" 9 Seeing many and strange marvels, forerunners of the
greatest, I greatly rejoice, gladdened in my heart, and am
amazed at the tender mercy of the Lord towards us, and His
exceeding forethought. For to-day are the indications of our
reconciliation with God ; to-day our outcast race, beholding
the preludes of our recall, rejoiced ; to-day, the forefathers
of our return to earth, hearing that the sentence was about
to be dissolved, as not heretofore, rejoice. Now, being evan-
gelized, that the most fragrant rose, planted in the unfruitful
ground [her barren parent], was about to smell sweetly to all
which is under the sun, and to expel the foul smell of the
transgression, they rejoice. Now, the whole creation, seeing the
purest temple of the All-ruling Christ being founded, bounds
for joy. — Let us all rejoice then and shout in psalmody, seeing
the nobility of our race beginning to be planted in the womb
of Anne, and let us make spiritual choirs, celebrating the con-
ception of her who will become the cause of all our gladness
and the agent of joy unutterable. Sing we harmoniously
to our God, sing we, as being, through Anne and Joachim,
enriched with the agent of our freedom, who were enslaved
to sin, the Virgin, all-spotless Lady. "We, who offended, are
freed from condemnation ; we, the disobedient, are received ;
we, who laded ourselves with the unbearable burden of our
sins, are called to rest. Of all these things and of all the rest,
the present feast is the beginning and cause, as a day-star
arising before the sun, and by itself indicating all [feasts]."
And further on : —
" J Wherefore all things to-day rejoice with joy, and our
9 Orat.in Cone. S.Deip. n.l. 2. Syll. Mon. i. pp. 121— 12G.
1 Ib. n. 10. Syll. i. 136—138.
as of the Mother of God, our Redeemer. 357
nature bringeth voices of thanksgiving to God, saying, 'I
thank thee, O Lord, that Thou hast raised me, barren and un-
fruitful, to child-bearing ; that Thou hast begun to clear away
the thorns of the condemnation, and hast through the divine
Anne and Joachim levelled me for cultivation. I thank Thee
Who didst chasten and dost again receive me. What shall I
repay Thee, Who didst for the transgression condemn me
to bear in sorrows, and again through a birth, evangelizest the
indications of joy ? Now a rose from me appearing, Mary, in
the womb of Anne, removes out of the way the ill-savour from
my corruption, and giving her own good-savour, makes me
share divine exultation. Through a woman am 1 hitherto un-
happy; through a woman have I now become happy. For I
See the things, foretold by Thy prophets concerning Thee,
beginning to be accomplished, and I expect to see the end
thereof, as not heretofore. Now is the Virgin, who shall have
and bear Thee, the Emmanuel, planted in the womb of the
barren, and the light cloud [on which God should come, Isa.
xix. 1] is being formed ; and the rod is rooted, whereon I shall
be stayed [Isa. xi. 1]. Now is the door, looking Eastward
according to Ezekiel, and reserved for Thee Alone for entrance,
being formed."
Nicon, a Greek monk, who lived about A.D. 1060,
under three Patriarchs of Antioch whom he men-
tions, John, Nicolas, Peter, in an Arabic Typicon
in 40 chapters, exhibits the Greek Feasts, as they
were in his day in the Patriarchate of Antioch, and
has Dec. 9, " the Conception of S. Anne, when she
conceived the B. V. M. Theotokos 2."
In like way her Nativity itself was celebrated as
the prelude of the Incarnation, the first earthly
moment of the Mother of the Redeemer of the
world.
2 In Bibl. Or. i. 620, quoted by Ass. Kal. v. 434.
358 Festival of the birth of the Theotokos.
" * Of this so bright and most glorious advent of God to
men, there must needs be some vestibule of joys, through
which the great gift of salvation advances towards us. And
such is the present festival, having, as its prelude, the birth of
the Theotokos, and as its term, the destined concretion of the
Word with the flesh."
And Photius : —
" * As we know that the root is the cause of the branches
and trunk and fruit and flowers, although the care and
pains bestowed on the rest is for the fruit's sake, and none of
the rest spring forth apart from the root, so, without the
Virgin's festival, no one of those things which spring from her
come to light. For the Resurrection is, because there was
Death; and Death, because Crucifixion — and the Birth of
Christ, to speak briefly and well, was, because of the Virgin's
birth. So, the Virgin's festival, fulfilling the office of root, or
fountain, or foundation, or whatever could be said more appro-
priate, is brightened by all those festivals, and is distinguished
by many gifts, and is known as the day of the salvation of the
whole world. For to-day the Virgin Mother is born from a
barren mother, and the palace of the Lord's sojourning is
prepared."
The evidence of the Greek Calendars and
Icons also shows that the subject of the Festival is
the Conception of the Blessed Virgin, in those
first beginnings. The festival is entitled " 5 The
Conception of Anne," " 6 The Conception of the
holy Anne, the mother of the Theotokos." The
8 Andr. Cret. in Nat. B. M. Combef. Auct. i. 1289. 1292.
4 Horn, in S. Maria3 Nativ. in Combef. ib. pp. 1584. 1586.
6 " Both Vatican Codd. Euss. and Fasti Graeco-Moschi."
-Assem. Kal. T. v. p. 432.
8 " Basilian and ordinary Greek Menologies." — Ib.
Conception of John Bap t. in same Churches. 359
Icons embrace three stages7: 1) the Angel ap-
pearing to Joachim praying, announcing to him
the Conception of his daughter ; 2) another
Angel to Anne, signifying the same ; 3) Joachim
and Anne embracing one another, " signifying that
Mary, their daughter, was conceived," or " as a
symbol of the fact of her conception 8."
This is further illustrated by the fact, that the
Conception of S. John Baptist was also celebrated
by the same Churches which celebrated the Con-
ception of the B.Y.9 The festival was known in
the Russian Church as " the Conception of S. John
the forerunner ' ;" in the Basilian and ordinary
Greek Menologies it is called " the Conception
of the holy Elizabeth when she conceived the
Holy John the Baptist 2 ;" and so in the marble
r Assem. ib. p. 252, from an Anthology in Culcinius. " In
all, both Greek and Ruthenian pictures, Joachim is repre-
sented in the Temple, or rather adorned chamber, embracing
and kissing Anne his wife. So also in the smaller triptych in
Papebroch, p. lx., with the inscription above, ' Conception of
S. Anne,' and at each side in the lower margin the names
'Anna,' ' Joachim.' "— Ib. p. 432.
8 Assem. Kal. v. 252.
9 From Assem. Kal. Eccl. Univ. T. v. p. 250, on Sept. 23.
1 Tab. Papebroch.
2 Menol. Basilian., p. 63, ib. Assem. adds, "the Codd.
Vaticani Euthenici," and " a metrical September of the Greeks,"
"but on the 23rd the womb received the forerunner within."
In a Greek Mosc. picture, the Angel Gabriel is represented
announcing to Zechariah that Elizabeth should have a son. —
Ass. v. 250. Sollier adds, " Kalendarium Constantinop., Kal.
360 F. of Conception of S. John Baptist.
Calendar of the Neapolitan Church, which is the
earliest notice of the Feast of the Conception of
the Blessed Virgin in the West ; " for," Assemanni
says, "that Church Grecised of old." The Ar-
menian Bishop, whose testimony is quoted for
the existence of the festival of the Conception
of the B. V. in Armenia, mentioned at the same
time the fact of the celebration of the Conception
of S. John Baptist. "Being asked whether the
Conception of the B. V. was celebrated in his parts,
he answered, c It is celebrated, and this is the
reason: because the Conception itself took place,
the angel announcing to Joachim grieving, and at
that time living in the desert. In like way also
the Conception of the Bl. John Baptist, for the like
reason. But of the Conception of the Lord which
took place, the Angel 'announcing it to Mary, who
conceived of the Holy Ghost, none of the faithful
doubt V ' It seems, from the form of speech, that
the faithful must have doubted about the others,
since of the Conception of the Lord alone he
says, " of it none of the faithful doubt."
The Syrians called the Conception of S. John
Baptist u the Annunciation to Zechariah 4."
In the West, the Feast of the Conception of
the B. V. was brought by the Greeks with them,
Eccl. Neap., Usuard in omnibus omnino antiquis Martyro-
logiis," in adj. obss. p. 555 in Holland. T. vii. Jun.
8 Matth. Paris., ad ann. 1228.
4 Assem. Kal. T. v. p. 433.
Beginning of F. of Cone, of B. V. in West. 361
first to Sicily and Naples 5 ; and so was held on the
same day upon which they themselves celebrated
it, that upon which (the Nativity being fixed for
September 8) the Blessed Virgin must first have
received in her mother's womb the rudiments of
her body. It seems to have been propagated
further by private devotion, probably by religious ;
at least, we find it first among the Canons of
Lyons ; then, that Matthew Paris relates that the
16th Abbot of S. Alban's (Geoffroy, Abbot from
1119 to 1146), enjoined that the Conception, with
some other feasts, should be kept festively in copes6.
The inquiries, which he relates to have been made in
A.D. 1228, of the Armenian Bishop, were made by
Monks, and imply that it was both celebrated in
England, although not universally, and was doubted
5 Assemanni (Kalend. Eccl. Univ. v. 458) speaks of the
Conception of the Holy Deipara being received from the
Greeks, and says that it was received at Naples first, " yet
after the manner received from the Greeks, viz. on Dec. 9,
appealing to a marble Neapolitan Calendar of the 9th century,
and Mazocchi in vetus Marmoreum S. Neap. Eccl. Comm. Neap.
1744. P. Ballerini has shown that Peter of Argos, who
preached on the Conception in Sicily, became Bishop of Argos
at some time after A.D. 879 (De Petr. Arg. Episc. Hist. disq.
n. 3—12. Syll. Diss. i. 107—118.
8 " The feast of St. Giles, and the Conception of the B.V.,
and the feast of S. Catharine, for reverence to God and His
saints, be ordered to be celebrated festivally in copes." Matth.
Paris vitae 23 S. Alban. Abbat. p. 64. I do not think that the
narrative implies that this was not the first appointment of the
festivals.
362 Cone, of B. V. objected to, or kept in view of
of7. With this it agrees, that those who first
speak of it, to condemn it, speak of it as the act
of a few. " Some sometimes celebrated, and per-
haps still celebrate it," says Beleth (Rector of the
Theological School at Paris, A.D. 1162). S. Ber-
nard treats of it as a novel and unauthorized act of
the Canons of Lyons. Sicardus, in Italy, A.D. 1185,
repeats Beleth's words. Bp. Hugutio, the Canonist,
about 1260, speaks of "a celebration in many
regions, and especially in England, " but equally
condemns it. John de Friburg [Joannes Theuto-
nicus], A.D. 1250, repeats him. S. Raymund de
Penyafort, Penitentiary of Gregory IX., notes its
absence from the Decretals, and approves its omis-
sion. Durandus, eminent both as a Canonist and
writer on ritual, in the special confidence of
Gregory X., A.D. 1274, states the grounds of those
who celebrated it to be the same as among the
Greeks, that " the Mother of the Lord was con-
ceived," but rejected it.
Hugo de S. Caro, A.D. 1245, spoke of its not
not being celebrated (authoritatively, I suppose),
yet suggests that such as kept it, should keep it in
view of the subsequent sanctification. S. Bona-
ventura, who died A.D. 1274, mentions some who,
out of special devotion, celebrated it ; and, although
not considering it safe, suggests the same ground.
7 Assemamri thinks that both inferences are true, and that
this doubt is a proof that there was no Council under Anselin.
Kalendar. v. 455.
her subsequent sanctifaation or the Incarnation. 363
" 8 The Church celebrates the feast of the Conception of no
one, save the Son of Grod Alone in the Annunciation to the
B. V. M. Yet there are-some who, out of a special devotion,
celebrate the Conception of the B. V., whom I dare not either
altogether praise, nor simply blame. I dare not altogether
praise, because holy Fathers, who, by the teaching of the Holy
Spirit, appointed other feasts of the Virgin, who also were great
lovers and venerators of the B.V., did not teach to solemnize
her Conception. The Bl. Bernard, too, a chief lover of the
Virgin and zealot for her honour, reprehends those who cele-
brate her Conception. All the statutes of the universal Church
about the festivals of the saints are founded on sanctity, so
that on no day does she hold any solemnity for any saint, in
which or for which it was not a holy person to whom that
honour is paid. If, then, holiness was not in the Virgin before
the infusion of the soul, it does not seem altogether safe to
celebrate the festival of her Conception. JN~or yet dare I alto-
gether reprehend it, because, as some say, this festival began,
not by human invention but by Divine revelation ; which, if
it be true, without doubt it is good to hold festival on her
Conception. But since this is not authentic, we are not com-
pelled to believe it ; also, since it is not against right faith, we
are not compelled to deny it. It may also be, that that festival
is referred to the day of the Sanctification, rather than of the
Conception. And since the day of the Conception is certain,
and the day of the Sanctification uncertain (as will appear
below), therefore not unreasonably the festival of the day of
Sanctification may be placed on the day of Conception, nor
without ground : because, although the day of the Conception
ought not to be celebrated, on the ground that there was not
holiness in what was conceived, they may yet irreprehensibly
rejoice for the holy soul for what was then begun. For who,
hearing that the Virgin, from whom the salvation of the whole
world came forth, was conceived, would neglect to return
thanks to Grod, and omit to ' exult in G-od his Saviour,' save
one who felt less devoutly towards the glorious Virgin, and who
8 3 dist. iii. P. i. art. i. q. 1.
364 S. Bonav., ^Egidius^ Council of Canterbury,
considered the present more than the future, the deficiency of
good rather than its foundation ? For if a king's son be born
lame, being, in process of time, to be delivered from that lame-
ness, men would not have to grieve for the lameness, but rather
to rejoice at the birth. In this way, if any one keeps feast on
the day of her Conception, regarding rather her future Sancti-
fication than her present Conception, he does not seem de-
serving of reproof, and therefore I said that I dare neither
blame nor praise those who so do."
.ZEgidius of Rome 9, after having spoken of the
Conception of the B. V. in original sin, mentions
two ways in which the Festival of the Conception
might be kept : —
" We will distinguish, then, as some distinguish and well,
that the B. V. was conceived to the world according to the
flesh, and conceived to God according to grace. At the time,
then, when she was conceived according to the flesh, we may
celebrate her feast by referring it to the conception according
to grace. For of many festivals we make an Octave, as, e. g.,
of the Nativity of the Lord ; we say through the whole Octave,
* To-day Christ was born ' — i. e. on such a day we celebrate the
Nativity of Christ. In like way we can say, ' To-day was the
Blessed Virgin conceived according to grace ' — i. e. on such a day
we celebrate such a feast of the Conception. As, then, on the
day in which Christ was not born, we say, ' To-day Christ was
born,' referring this to the day of the Nativity, so in the day of
the Conception of the B. V. according to the flesh, in which
she was not conceived according to grace, we may keep the
feast of the Conception of the Virgin, referring this to the
Conception according to grace. And as to many saints we cele-
brate the feast of the deposition of the body, not at the time
of the deposition, either because this is unknown, or from some
other cause. If, therefore, we celebrate the time of the deposi-
9 Quodlib. vi. 20, f. 93, Ven. 1504.
ground of keeping Fest. of Cone. 365
tion, we can say notwithstanding, * To-day was the deposition of
such a saint/ not at the time of the deposition, i. e. ' To-day is
reverenced and celebrated the day when the deposition of such
body took place.' Or we may say, as some say, and well, that
a more excellent honour and reverence are shown to the king's
eldest son too, because it is expected that he shall be in such
excellent dignity. In like way, the B. V., being conceived to
the world according to the flesh, was to be conceived to God
according to such excellence of grace. So that we can celebrate
her Conception according to the flesh, not because she was in
this way conceived holy, but because she was to be very holy,
so that there should be no celebration of any thing, except in
relation to holiness. For such was the excellence of her
holiness, that before she was holy reverence might be exhibited
to her, by reason of such excellence of holiness which was
to be in her. For we should not reprobate him who shows
reverence to raiment which any one had used, even before he
was a saint, if only he referred this to holiness."
The first known direction for the observance of
the Festival of the Conception of the B. V. in this
country, — the Constitution of Archbishop Mepham,
published in a Provincial Council of Canterbury,
A.D. 1328, — set forth this, as the ground, that
God had appointed " her predestinated Conception
for the temporal origin of His Only-Begotten and
the salvation of all," " the beginning of our salva-
tion, however remote." Had the Abp. been right
in regard to S. Anselm, we should have an instance
that one, who did not himself believe the im-
maculateness of the Conception, instituted the
Festival. The Decree ran, —
' l Moreover, since, among all saints, the memory of the most
1 Wilkins, Cone. ii. 552. The feast does not occur in the
366 Date of the Festival in England.
Bl. Virgin and Mother of the Lord is the more frequently and
more festively celebrated, the greater grace she obtained with
God, Who truly ordered her predestinated Conception for the
temporal origin of His Only-Begotten and the salvation of all,
that thereby the beginning of our salvation, however remote,
wherein matter for spirituals occurs for devout minds, may
increase the joyous devotion and salvation of all, we, following
the steps of the venerable Ansel m our predecessor, who, after
some older solemnities, thought it meet to superadd the festi-
val of her Conception, decree and firmly enjoin that the
festival of the aforesaid Conception should be for the future
festively and solemnly celebrated in all Churches of our Pro-
vince of Canterbury."
S. Thomas speaks of the Church of Rome as
tolerating but not celebrating the festival, and
full list of feasts prescribed in the Synod of Worcester, A.D.
1240 (Wilkins, Cone. i. 677, 678), nor in the Synod of Exeter,
in 1287 (c. 23. Ib.ii. 146). Lupus' statement, that " Stephen,
in his Synod of Oxford, celebrated under Honorius III., A.D.
1188 [1222], enacted, 'Let all festivals of Mary be kept with
all veneration, except the Feast of the Conception, as to the
observance of which no necessity is imposed " (Notes on
Leo IX. Concil. Mogunt., p. 497), rests on a single Belgian
MS. from which Surius inserted the Canon in his Concilia. It
did not exist in the Cotton MS., from which Sir H. Spelman
published the Council, nor in that which Lyndwode used in his
Provinciale Angliae, Paris, 1502. The tone of that canon is also
altogether different from the other Constitutions of Stephen
Langton, then promulgated. For these embody mostly some
scriptural or religious ground (Wilkins, Cone. i. 585, sqq.) ;
the canon, added in the one MS., is a dry enumeration of
festivals. The English MSS. are naturally more reliable than
the scarcely decipherable Belgian MS., from which Surius took
the canon. Moreover, had the Festival been mentioned by
Langton, it could hardly have been omitted in the lists of 1240
and 1287. It was prescribed A.D. 1362, by Abp. Simon
Islip, and about 1400 by Abp. Arundel.
Feast of the Sanctification of B. V. at Rome. 367
assigns the same ground : the objection which he
answers, only stated that " some " celebrated it.
Ralph de Rivo (who died at Rome, A.D. 1390)
under Urban VI., still speaks of only three days
of the B. Y. being in the Roman Office2. But
Alvarus Pelagius, who died some time after 1340,
mentions that the festival (which he calls the
festival of " the Sanctification of the B. V.") was
held in the Church of S. Mary Major; and John
Bacon, a Carmelite, who died A.D. 1350, says, that
" 3 it had long been celebrated in the house of the
brothers of the order of the Bl. Mary of Carmel,
with the venerable congregation of the Cardinals,
and so had lasted in the time of many Roman
Pontiffs to the present time." He himself argues
at length that the festival of the Conception was to
be celebrated on Dec. 8.
"* Although she contracted original sin, as a daughter of
Adam, yet that day of her Conception is venerable, on account
of the Sanctification, which was ordained from eternity, and in
relation to her subsequent consent."
But the Church of S. Mary Major was no in-
sulated case.
In the first Carthusian statutes, or Customs of
Guigo, the 5th Prior, there is no mention of the
2 De Canon. Observ. Prop. 12. Bibl. P. xxvi. 300.
3 In Sent. iv. d. 2 art. 3. fin.
* Ib. art. 2. p. 315.
368 Festival of Sanctification for Conception.
Feast, only of the Purification, Annunciation,
Assumption, Nativity 5.
In some old Carthusian statutes 6, without date,
but probably soon after 1264, as one refers to (as
it seems) the recent institution of the Festival of
Corpus Christi by Urban IV 7., there is a statute,
" 8 In the Feast as to the Conception of Bl. Mary,
in place of Conception, let it be said, Sanctifica-
tion."
Turrecremata gives, in addition, the beginning
of the first Collect, " Hear, 0 merciful Lord, the
supplication of Thy servants, that we, who are
gathered together in the sanctification of the
Virgin Mother of God 9," &c.
6 c. 8. n. 7 (about 1120—1137), Basle 1510. In the
Statuta Nova, P. 2. c. 4. n. 26, abstinence is enjoined on the
vigils of the five festivals of the Bl. Virg., but they are not
named in the statute.
6 In Mabillon, Ann. Bened. vi. App. p. 685, sqq.
7 " Since our Lord, the Sovereign Pontiff, has ordained and
strictly charged, in virtue of holy obedience, that the Festival
of Corpus Christi should be solemnly celebrated by all, we, for
reverence to God and the sacred precept, ordain and enjoin, in
the same way as is enjoined in the decretal, that the festival
be held in our order," &c., n. 4.
8 n. 45. At the same time permission was granted to the
Prior and convent of Liminati, and to others who should be
so pleased, to celebrate solemnly the feast of the Conception
of the B. V., and that the office should be as in the Nativity,
substituting the name ' Conception' for that of ' Nativity.' >!
n. 26.
9 " Supplicationem servorum tuorum, Deus miserator, exaudi,
ut qui in sanctificatione Dei genetricis et Virginis congre-
among Carthusians and Dominicans. 369
In the "New Constitutions of the Carthusian
Order, promulgated by William Rainald, Prior
A.D. 13681,'' the observation was prescribed, but
under the name, " the Feast of the Sanctification of
the B. Mary."
" 2 In the Feast, the Sanctification of the Bl. Mary, let the
Office be as in her Nativity, the name of the Nativity being
changed into the name of ' Sanctification.' "
And this was not repealed for nearly a century
and a half — 141 years. In the third Compilation of
Statutes, promulgated by Francis de Puteo, 1509,
it is enacted, —
" * Let the feast of the glorious Virgin Mary, which is
solemnly celebrated on the 6th of the Ides of December, be
henceforth celebrated throughout the whole Order, under the
name of the Conception, according to the determination of the
Church, the statute making mention of the * Sanctification' not-
withstanding."
gamur," &c., Turr. P. 6. c. 35, de Ord. Carthus., quoted by
De Alva, n. 231, p. 647. The Breviary, printed in the Car-
thusian monastery at Ferrara, A.D. 1503, from which De Alva
quotes the same prayer with the word " Conception," is stated
to have been " diligently amended." De Alva states that
rubrics in a Carthusian Breviary, Yenice, 1491, used the title
" The Conception of the B.V." (n. 231, p. 647). But in the
" declaration of the Chapter " A. 1470, which he quotes, there
is no mention of the name of the Festival, and in the declara-
tion of the Chapter A. 1418, it is only said, that on the Festival
the " Gloria in excelsis " should be said. The Paris Breviary,
1511, is two years after the statute directing the change.
1 Prolog.
" Statuta nova Pars i. c. 2. n. 8. Basle, 1510.
3 c. 1. f. b 5. Eeference is made to the c. 2, 3 part. n. 17,
as abrogated ; but, being abrogated, it has disappeared.
A a
370 Old Dominican Service- Books in their
•
Of his own time, De Turrecremata says 4, —
" Of no slight authority is the testimony of the most sacred
Carthusian Order, which, throughout the world, celebrates this
Festival, only under the name of the Sanctification, saying in
the first Collect" (as above).
In an old Dominican service-book there is no
mention of any Festival, whether of the Concep-
tion or Sanctification 5. Another stage, apparently,
was that the Festival of the Sanctification was
mentioned in the Calendar, but it did not appear
in its place among the Feasts 6. In another, the
feast of the Sanctification occurs generally, without
any specific mention of original sin ; and this seems
to have been used both before and after that pub-
lished through the influence of Bandellus 7. Some-
4 I.e.
6 As in a Breviary and a Missal, both printed in Venice,
1484. (The office-books not specified as being in the Bodleian
are in the Brit. Mus., and have been kindly examined for me
by the Eev. E. Hoskius.) Quetif says, " The Feast of the Sanc-
tification of the B. Y. was unknown in our Calendars and
Breviaries before 1388, when in a General Chapter held at
Khodez, it was directed that it should be celebrated the day
after S. Matthias, Feb. 25. No special office for this festival
adapted to our use occurs to me till now before the Pontificate
of Sixtus IV" (A.D. 1471—1484), i. 724.
6 As in a Missal printed at Venice, A. D. 1482, and another
at Lubeck, A. 1507 [both Bodl.]. In like way, in a Cistercian
Missal [sine loco] A. 1487 [Bodl.], the Conception stands in
the Calendar, no direction as to the office occurs in the body
of the Missal.
7 In a Breviary printed at Nuremberg, A. D. 1485, the Anti-
phone at the first Vespers is, " Christ, before the creation of
bearing on the Sanctification of the B. V. 371
what later, in a Breviary revised under Card. Aug.
Gallamin, Brasicholensis, General, A.D. 1608,
"amended, approved, and confirmed by Apostolic
authority" [Paul V.], published at Rome A. 1611,
and ordered to be used exclusively in the Order,
" the Sanctification of the B. V." stands in the
Calendar, and the rubric directs, " 8 in the Sancti-
the world, provided the health-giving Sanctification of His
mother." The Collect is the same as that of the Carthusians
(above, p. 368). (The sequel of the Collect is printed out in
the Missal of Venice, 1496, " may, through her intercession,
be by Thee from imminent perils delivered. Through Him,
&c.") The invitatory at Matins is, " Come, the Son of the
Virgin let us all adore, and for the Sanctification of the Virgin
let us all jubilate." The first Antiphone in the Venice Office
is, " Let us all rejoice in the Lord, celebrating the Festival
under the honour of the Virgin Mary, at whose Sanctification
Angels rejoice and praise the Son of Grod." In the Missal,
A. 1562, " reformed according to the decrees of the general
Chapter held at Salamanca, A.D. 1551, and approved by
Apostolic authority, as may be seen in the following leaf,"
there stands in the Collect, "in the Sanctification of the
Mother [Grenitricis] of God and Virgin," for " in the Sancti-
fication of the Bl. Virgin." This was reprinted, Venice, 1579,
and also Venice, 1596, in the Dominican Missal, " under the
most reverend Father Br. Hippolytus Maria Beccaria a Monte-
regali, General of the whole Order, A. D. 1595, reformed, en-
larged, and confirmed and approved by Apostolic authority "
[Clement VIII.]. In the Missal edited by command of the
most reverend F. Br. Antonine Cloche, Paris, 1721 (after the
copy published at Eome, A. 1705), the " Gaudeamus omnes in
Domino" is retained, but " conception" is throughout substi-
tuted for " Sanctification."
8 Die viii. Decembris. In sanctificatione B. M. V. totum
duplex omnio, praeter lectiones infra scriptas de Officio Nativi-
A a 2
372 Office of Vine. Bandellus.
fication of the B. V., let all, except the lessons
below, be taken from the Office of Nativity, the
name ' Nativity ' being changed into that of
c Sanctification.' ' The lessons are, — Noct. i.,
Ecclus. xiv. ; Noct. ii., S. Ambr. de Virgin, ii.
init. ; Noct. iii., S. Aug. de cons. Ev. c. 1. All
reference to the Conception is thus avoided.
The same is repeated in an Office also published
at Rome in 1615, "reformed and approved by
Apostolic authority," but under a different Gene-
ral1.
The Office known as that of Vincentius Ban-
dellus was published while Joachim Turrianus
was General and Bandellus was only President of
the Congregation in Lombardy, 1493. The Office
had then been recently composed 2. It was framed
to bring out in a marked way the doctrine, that
our Lord Alone was conceived without stain, and
that in the Blessed Virgin the original stain was
removed by the copious grace of subsequent sanc-
tification.
The first Antiphone is, " She is beautiful among
the daughters of Jerusalem, as ye have seen her,
tatis ipsius assumantur, mutato Nativitatis vocabulo in Sanc-
tificationem. [Bodl.]
1 Breviarium juxta ritum Sacri Ordinis FF. Praed. S.P.N.
Dominici, auctoritate Apostolica reforrnatum et approbatum,
jussu vero editum E. P. Fr. Seraphini Sicci Papiensis, totius
ordinis prsefati Ord. Generalis Magistri. Roma?, 1615.
2 Note in red letters at the end of the Breviary, Venice,
1494.
Office of Vine. Bandellus. 373
full of charity and love, so, too, in her mother's
womb she was by the copious gift of sanctification
cleansed from all defilements of sin." In a versicle
and response is the text so often quoted by mediaeval
writers ; V. " Take away the rust from the silver,"
R. " And a most pure vessel shall go. forth." In
the Antiphone on the Magnificat are the words,
" Thou art all beautiful, because through the grace
of sanctification no stain remained in thee."
The Collect is, " 0 God, Who after the infusion
of the soul, didst, through the copious gifts of grace,
wonderfully cleanse the most blessed Virgin Mary
from all stain of sin, and didst afterwards confirm
her in the purity of holiness, grant, we beseech
Thee, that we who are gathered together in honour
of her Sanctification, may through her intercession
be by Thee delivered from the impending dangers.
Through, &cA" The invitatory at Matins was,
" The sanctification of the Virgin Mary let us
celebrate : Christ her Son the Lord let us adore/'
A hymn addresses our Lord as being " Alone
8 The same Collect occurs in " the Missal, Venice, 1506 and
1512. Mass on the Sanctification of the most Bl. Virgin,
edited by the most reverend Father Vincentius Bandellus de
Castro novo," and even in Paris, 1519, in two editions ; the
one in the Paris Academy. The statement of Spondanus,
then, must have referred to something temporary and local,
when he says (Ann. T.2. ad Ann. 1387, n. 7), that in that year
the Dominicans were induced by the King of France to cele-
brate the Feast of the Conception, in consequence of the com-
motion raised in that year through, the theses of John de
Montesono.
374 Breviary of Church of
conceived without stain ;" and speaks of His sancti-
fying His Mother.
Bernardine de Bustis doubtless alluded to this
Breviary when he used the strong term, —
" 4 1 composed an office of the innocence of the most pure
Virgin, not, as a certain man did, of her contamination and
corruption."
The Office from the Breviary of the Church of
Gironne, in Catalonia, gave in its lessons the doc-
trinal statement, that the sanctification followed
immediately after the infusion of the soul 5.
" The great Artificer, "Who willeth that none should perish,
by that love wherewith He pitied exceedingly man whom He
had created and made, though undeserving, built Himself a
house, where He should personally reside in this world, and
thence take fitting arms to war against the devil, who had
fraudulently taken captive the whole human race. This house
was the Bl. V. Mary, of which Solomon thus speaks in the
Proverbs : ' Wisdom built her an house, she hewed out seven
pillars.' This house also not only did the Almighty Lord
build, when, on the 80th day from her carnal Conception in the
womb of her mother Anne, He infused into her a soul, yea
moreover more fully did He there immediately 6 sanctify her.
4 Serm. 9. p. 1. f. 109, col. 2, quoted by De Alva, Ver. 231,
p. 651. Eosarium iii. 102.
6 Turrecremata says, that what he quotes had been "ex-
tracted from Breviaries of that same Church, which I have had
from some Fathers of this same sacred Council, who, in singing
the hours, observe the custom of the aforesaid Church."
P. 6. c. 14, f. 106 v.
6 De Alva censures Card, de Turrecremata for omitting here
the word "statim." The word makes no difference as to the
meaning; for the "forthwith" is in fact contained in the
' Gironne in Catalonia. 375
Eor of this may be understood what is written in 2 Kings,
''Immediately she was sanctified from her uncleanness,' i.e.
from original fault. But it must be understood that this feast
ought not to be referred to the Conception of the Bl. Mary,
which was from the flesh, since no oiie, conceived from human
seed, was ever free from original sin, * not even an infant of one
day, if his life shall be upon the earth.' Whence also Augus-
tine on John says, ' Who is innocent,' i.e. from the stain of ori-
ginal sin, ' except Christ, Who was not conceived of mortality?'
And he adds, ' All come from that root and from that stock,
of which David says, " I was conceived in iniquities, and in sins
did my mother nourish me." ' For when David said this of
himself, he excused no one conceived of human seed. Yet the
Bl. V., by special privilege of God, was fully sanctified in the
womb of her mother. And this is declared when it is said,
' Of the aromas of myrrh and frankincense, and all the odours
of the spiceman ;' for as the aromas, placed under coals, trans-
mute the evil of the smoke, so that the smoke which was before
hurtful, before the placing of the aromas thereon, after they
have been placed, is odoriferous and comforting, so the stain
of original sin transmitted to her with her mortal life was, by
the grace of sanctification, absorbed 8."
The Collect referred to the sanctification of the
Conception, not to the Conception, as though this
were in itself immaculate.
"•Grant to us, we beseech Thee, Almighty and merciful
God, that we, who commemorate the sanctification of the
Conception of the B. Mary, Ever- Virgin, in the womb of her
mother, wrought by Thee, may, by aid of her merit and inter-
history of Bathsheba, which is mystically explained of it.
MSS., however, may have varied.
7 2 Sam. xi. 4.
' Transcribed by Alva, n. 231, in correction of Turrecre-
mata's.
• I.e.
376 Other Breviaries,
cessions, be found worthy to rejoice with Thee without end in
heaven."
Turrecremata prefaces his extracts by the
words, —
" The most famous Church of Gironne, in the kingdom of
Catalonia, professeth the faith most manifestly in the Office
which it sings yearly in the Feast of the Sanctification of the
Conception of the B. V., in whose Feast the whole Office, which
is put together from authorities of Holy Scripture and sayings
of Aug., Jerome, and other saints, alike in the little chapters,
the responsories, the hymns, and the orison, say that she was
sanctified from original sin, .to which she had been subjected."
The whole, although an insulated case, is the
more remarkable, as occurring in Spain.
The other office, which Card. Turrecremata
mentions, as chanted " * in many parts of Germany,"
coincides with what we have found in Theologians,
the belief that the B. V. was sanctified in her
mother's womb, but that the consequences of
original sin still continued, until extinguished by
the overshadowing of the Holy Ghost at the In-
carnation.
" 2 Also, what the Church chants in many parts of Germany,
in the Feast of S. Elizabeth (as ancient Breviaries attest),
whose Matin Office in the lessons is as follows :" —
1 I quoted this in my " Eirenicon," " in the office then used in
Germany in the Feast of Elizabeth." Perrone says in the same
way, " Officiumin Gerraania receptum " (De Imm. B.V. Cone,
i. 15. 3. Pareri. p. 425). I had not then access to Turr.'s
exact words.
2 1. c. Alva, n. 231.
attesting the same belief. 377
" Who shall find a strong woman ? Far and from the
utmost bounds is her price. Ingushing in the senses of man
the ancient streams of corruption and fault, it pours itself
more in the weaker vessels 3, according to that, ' One man out
of a thousand have I found, a woman in all those have I not
found.' ' One,' i.e. Christ, one out of a thousand, generated
without the fomes. Of Whom Jeremiah saith, ' The Lord
shall do a new thing upon the earth.' ' But a woman out of
all have I not found.' For the Bl. Virgin, though full of
grace, was born with the fomes, which yet the virtue of the
Most Highest extinguished at the very time of the Concep-
tion of Christ, according to that, ' The Holy Ghost shall
supervene into thee, and the virtue of the Most Highest
shall overshadow thee.' For the refrigeration of this over-
shadowing repelled from her the incentive of the whole
fomes."
Besides these specific Breviaries, Turrecremata
claims the authority of a much wider practice, as
evidenced in the Office of the Nativity of the B. V.
He introduces the citations from them thus : —
"To the same effect seems to be the profession of the
Universal Church, which commonly on the Day of the Nativity
of the most Bl. Virgin in many Churches diffused throughout
the world, among the matin lessons, mentions at the beginning
that of Bernard on the Feast of her Assumption (as quoted
above), viz. that 'it is altogether clear that the Bl. Virgin was
cleansed from original contagion,' from which it clearly follows
that she was at one time subject to it. Whence the Universal
Church, using these words of the Bl. Bernard in the aforesaid
Feast, seems to canonize the doctrine of the Bl. Bernard in this
matter; whose doctrine most manifestly containeth that the
Conception of the B. V. was in original sin, as is manifest
above by manifold testimony."
8 "Masculis," in De Alva, is a mistake for the "vasculis"
in Turr.
378 Clement VI., when Card. Abp. of Rouen.
Clement VI., A.D. 1339, while yet Cardinal and
Archbishop of Rouen 4, allowing that the Blessed
Virgin certainly "had original sin in the cause," and
leaving it an open question whether she had it "in
form " also, says, that in either case, the festival of the
Conception might be celebrated, since those too who
held that she was, in form also, in original sin, be-
lieve that she was soon sanctified. In the opinion,
then, of this Cardinal, who some five years after-
wards was elected Pope, the festival of the Concep-
tion did not necessarily involve its iinmaculateness.
" 5 But before I divide the theme, it seeraeth that that Con-
ception ought not to be celebrated, first, on the authority of
Bernard, who, in his Epistle to the Lyonnese [canons], gravely
reprehends them, because they had received the feast and held
it solemnly. Because no feast ought to be celebrated, except
for reverence of the sanctity of the person as to whom it is
celebrated, since such honour is shown to saints on account of
the [relation] which they have to God above others ; but this
is on account of holiness ; and not actual sin only, but original
sin also [separates 6] from God. But the B.Y. was conceived
in original sin, as many saints seem to say, and may be proved
by many grounds. It seems that the Church ought not to
hold a festival of her Conception. Here, being unwilling to
dispute, I say briefly that one thing is clear, that the B.Y.
contracted original sin in the cause. The cause and reason is
this, that, as being conceived from the coming together of man
* He is so entitled in the Jesus College MS., which contains
this and some other of his sermons.
8 In a sermon, " Signa erunt in sole." I have filled out De
Bandelis' citation here and there from the Jesus Coll. MS.
6 The word in the Jesus Coll. MS. is " designat," which
must be an error.
Clement XL 379
and woman, she was conceived through passion, and therefore
she had original sin in the cause, which her Son had not,
because He was not conceived of seed of man, but through the
mystic breathing (Luke i.), 'The Holy Spirit shall come upon
thee.' And therefore not to have original sin is a singular
privilege of Christ Alone. But whether she had 'in form*
original sin, or was by Divine virtue preserved, there are
different opinions among Doctors. But however it was, I say,
that if, in form and not in cause only, she had original sin, we
may still very reasonably keep festival of her Conception,
supposing that, according to all most opposed, it was but a
little hour that she was in original sin, because according to
all she was sanctified as soon as she could be sanctified."
So far from the celebration of the Festival of
the Conception of the B.V. involving necessarily
any belief that her Conception was Immaculate,
Clement XL, so late as the beginning of last cen-
tury, expressly guarded himself against the sup-
position, that, in enjoining the observation of the
Festival, he meant to rule any thing about the
controversy. In his Constitution on the Feast of
the Conception, Dec. 6, 1708, "Cujus Conceptio
gaudium annunciavit universe mundo," lest any
should think that he meant " ipso facto " to define
the controverted article, he does not call it " the
feast of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed
Virgin Mary," but " the feast of the Conception of
herself, the Blessed Mary Virgin, Immaculate "
[i.e. he so framed the sentence7, that the word
"Immaculate" could not be united with Con-
7 This was pointed out by Card. Gotti, in hig " La vera
Chiesa," against GK Picenino (De Inv. Sanct.) n. 33.
380 Bellarmine and Nat. Alexander,
ception. He said, not "festum Conceptionis im-
maculatse B. M. Virginis," but " festum Concep-
tionis ipsius B. M. Virginis immaeulatse "]. Lam-
bertini (Benedict XIV.), who quotes him, adds, —
•
"8Nay, when that Bull was printed in a certain city of
Italy with the title, ' That the Feast of the Immaculate Con-
ception of the Bl. Mary,' &c., that great Pontiff vehemently
complained of it, and, on Oct. 12, 1789, commanded the
Ordinary of the place sharply to reprehend those who had that
Bull printed with a falsified title, and commanded that it, so
printed, should be suppressed and prohibited from appearing."
Bellarmine, who piously believed the Immaculate
Conception, still asserts that it was " not the chief
foundation of the Festival."
" 9 The chief foundation of this festival is not the Immaculate
Conception of her who was to be the Mother of God. For
whatsoever that Conception may have been, from the very fact
that it was the Conception of the Mother of God, the memory
of it briogeth singular joy to the world. For then first had we
the certain pledge of redemption, especially since, not without
8 De Fest. Christi et B. M. V., ii. 15, p. 472.
9 De Cultu Sanctt. iii. 16. Bellarmine adds, " There is a
great difference between the Mother of God and His fore-
runner, and between the conception of each. For since the
greater part of the Church piously believe the Immaculate
Conception, the same Church had an occasion for instituting
this festival, which occasion it had not to institute a festival
on the Conception of John Baptist." But the present belief
(1586) of the [Roman] Church accounts for the spread
of the Festival, not for its institution. It would be also
to argue in a circle : " the Church's belief in the Imm. Cone,
was a ground of its institution," and " the Institution of the
Festival proves its immaculateness."
F. of Cone, proves not immaculateness. 381
a miracle, was she conceived of a barren mother. So then
they too, who believe that the Virgin was conceived in sin,
celebrate this festival."
In answer to the objection, " In this way the
Conception of John Baptist too could be celebrated,"
Bellarmine answers, —
" It could, as the Greeks do. For in the Greek Calendar, on
the 23rd of September, there is marked ' The feast of the Con-
ception of John Baptist.' But the Latin Church did not see
good to multiply so many festivals."
In 1679, Natalis Alexander, Dominican, — in
answer to the objection that " The Church main-
tained the Immaculate Conception of the B. V. as a
dogma of faith, to which, however, the consent of
the Fathers is opposed; therefore the consent of
the Fathers does not prove that any thing is to be
believed with divine faith," — denied that the Church
had laid down that it was so; and, in regard to
the celebration of the festival, he answered, —
" * The Feast of the Conception does not prove the immunity
of the B.Y. from original sin in the beginning of her Conception.
For the Feast of the Conception of S. John Baptist is inserted
in the old martyrologies, the Roman, Usuard's, and Adon's ;
and yet he was not conceived without the stain of original sin :
and the Conception of the B.V. is celebrated, not on account of
its own holiness, but on account of the holiness and dignity of
the person conceived, who was predestined in eternity and
conceived in time, to be the Mother of God. On which dignity
all her privileges are founded, and in regard to which all those
graces and prerogatives are ordered, and especially that purity,
than which none greater under God can be conceived."
1 Hist. Eccl. Sa3C. ii. Diss. xvi. § 21, p. 488.
382 Exaggeration in the argument
On the Office for the Conception by L. Noga-
rellus, which was approved by Sixtus IV., he
says, —
" It was approved by Sixtus TV., not as an evidence of faith,
but as a testimony and profession of piety ; but was judged by
Pius V. unworthy to be read in the Church, as being entirely
made up of fictitious authorities from the Fathers and eccle-
siastical testimonies, which, moreover, were nowhere found in
their works ; nor did it meet the mind of the Church : where-
fore this holy Pontiff suppressed it. But now in the office of the
Roman Church, there is not the slightest word [verbulum]
whereby the Immaculate Conception of the B.V. is indicated."
IV. In regard to any authority from Holy Scrip-
ture for the Immaculate Conception, I referred, in
my " Eirenicon," but very briefly to what Perrone
speaks of as the only Scriptural ground 2 of the Im-
maculate Conception, the "Protevangelium," where,
according to the present Vulgate, the crushing of
the serpent's head is ascribed immediately and
directly to the woman, " she shall bruise thy head,"
3 " The chief and almost unique testimony [produced by the
supporters of the Imm. Cone.] you may say to be Gen. iii. 14,
15. The other passages of the Bible which are wont to be
brought for the pious opinion from the O. T. especially, touch
thereon only in the mystical sense, and have their whole force
either from the exposition of Doctors, or from the use of the
Church, which is wont to accommodate to the B.V. not a few
texts, which in their literal and proper sense are said of Divine
"Wisdom or of the Divine Word. But much less can those be
urged which are taken from types and figures. For although
they are nowise to be despised by a Catholic, yet they are un-
suited to the object which I have proposed to myself, to inquire
as to the foundations for a dogmatic definition." P. 1. c. 9.
pp. 365, 368.
founded on the faulty reading " Ipsa" 383
for "It," or "He shall bruise thy head." The
argument, as you know, is, that, "if the woman
were to crush the head of the serpent or Satan, it
is inconceivable that she should for a moment, by
original sin, have been subject to him." Now, in
this argument there is, I think, a good deal of
exaggeration 3. For the question among those who
wrote on that Conception came to be, not at all as
to the responsible being, after she was born into
this world, but as to the foetus existing, soul and
body, in its mother's womb, yet not having, as far as
we know, consciousness, or will, or any capacity of
good or evil. To have consciousness in the Virgin's
womb, used to be treated of as a special prerogative
of our Lord, because He was not Man only, but
God4. In S. Bernard's time, or before, it was
3 De Turrecremata mentions incidentally in his work the
"declamation," the exaggerated and sometimes coarse (f. 201)
language, used by the maintainers of the Imm. Cone., to
describe what they held to be involved in the doctrine which
they opposed ; as, that the B. V. had been " the dwelling-place
of the demon, the captive of hell, the slave of devils, the hand-
maid of the devil" (f. 234 v.,— 236 v.), or that "she was
odious and hated by God " (f. 272 v.), "infected with malice"
(f. 273). He speaks of these revilings (convicia) as being the
chief arguments on that side (ib.). He says (f. 201), that
" such terms ought not to have been used by those who, by the
most sacred constitution of the sacred Council, were appointed
to inquire into the truth, not to inveigh, and provoke the minds
of the simple, by certain (salva pace) false witnesses, since
they who say that she was subject to original sin, do not say
that," &c.
4 Vazquez (in 3 P. q. 27, cc. 3, 4) and Suarez (in 3 P. q. 27,
384 Exaggeration by maintainers of Imm. Cone.
granted that, from the first moment of her exist-
ence on this earth, the B.V. was free from original
sin, having been cleansed from it in her mother's
womb. At a later time, some, who yet maintained
the transmission of original sin to her, as having
been naturally descended from Adam, minimized
the time in which she remained under it as much
as possible. They felt themselves bound by the
tradition which they had received, to hold that she
had not been exempted from it, but conceived that
she was freed from it in her mother's womb at the
earliest possible period consistent with her having,
by the law of her conception, contracted it at all.
The language, then, of maintainers of the Imma-
culate Conception does seem to me exaggerated,
when they say, that if conceived in original sin,
she was " under the power of the devil," because
of this momentary interval, in which the unborn
and, as far as we know, unconscious being was
conceived with that taint, from which God, it was
held, freed her immediately. We should not speak
of S. John Baptist or Jeremiah as having been
sectt. 7, 8) hold " that the B. V. had the use of reason from the
beginning of her Conception, and supernatural knowledge ; and
that her sanctification was wrought through an act of her own
free-will, loving God above all things, through the grace given
to her." This they ground on the miracle wrought on John
Baptist in his mother's womb, whereby, at the presence of
Jesus, he "leaped for joy " (arguing that more would be given
to the Mother of the Lord) ; and Suarez also, on the authority
of S. Bernardine.
If " Ipsa " wrong, argument falls. 385
under the power of the devil ; as many, at least, as
believe that they were sanctified in their mothers'
wombs; and yet in them no one doubts that what
to us who, by infant-Baptism, are freed from the
guilt of original sin, is the heaviest consequence
of it, viz. " that the flesh lusteth contrary to the
spirit," remained.
However, if the " Protevangelium " is to prove
that she personally bruised the serpent's head, it
must be that this is said of her personally, as it
would be if the reading of the Vulgate were
right, " ipsa conteret caput tuum." I referred
before, as in a very simple matter, to the authority
of the great Roman Catholic critic, De Rossi ;
and now, since his book is not in every one's
hands, I will set down his arguments in proof
that the reading " ipsa " is wrong. I would only
premise that, whereas in languages in which the
gender of the pronoun is marked and not that
of the verb, the question necessarily turns on the
pronoun, not on the verb; contrariwise in Hebrew,
the question turns on the verb only, it being one
of the observed archaisms of the Pentateuch, that
KlH, the masculine form, is used of the feminine
also. But although NIH might represent alike
" ipse " or " ipsa," yet when joined with a masculine
verb, "]3it£M, no one who knows any thing of Hebrew
could doubt that it ought to be rendered " he " or
u it," not " she." To turn, however, to De Rossi's
summary : —
B b
386 De Rossi's grounds for holding that
" 5 Few, doubtful and altogether unreliable are the Hebrew
MSS. in support of it (NTi), in which yod is perhaps a little vaw
(* for 1) and with shurek or the vowel of the masculine :
uncertain and deviating from the reliableness of all the rest is
that Greek (whether interpreter or scholiast), perhaps only
indicating the reading of Latin MSS. or some Father : solitary
and to be set aside is that copy of Onkelos. The reading of
the Vulgate, though much better supported, is not yet suffi-
ciently certain, on account of the dissent of the MSS. and
Jerome; nor is it of any certain, but rather of altogether
doubtful and even (as we shall see below) suspected origin, so
that it is rather to be accounted among the errors in that
version; and the most learned expositors and critics among
Catholics so in fact account it.
"But for the masculine Nltt there stand — 1) the consent
and testimony of almost all Hebrew MSS. ; 2) the analogy of
the sacred context, in which the verb which follows and the
pronoun suffixed are masculine; 3) the Samaritan text and
Samaritan version ; 4) the Greek version of the LXX., all the
MSS. Editions and Versions derived from it, Ethiopic, Coptic,
and old Latin, and those who used it, whether Greek-speaking
Jews, as Philo, or Christian writers, agreeing; 5) all the
Chaldee paraphrases, Onkelos, Jonathan, and the Jerusalem ;
6) all the other Versions of the East, the oldest Syriac, the
Arabic of Saadias, the Mauritanian Arabic of Erpenius, the
Persian of Tawos ; 7) some MSS. of the Vulgate, as the Oblong
of S. Germain and the Correctorium Sorbonicum, Stephen's
Biblia, Paris, 1540 and 1546, ad marg., the Biblia Lovan. of
Henten, and the Notationes of Lucas Brugensis — Lindanus
adds four Louvain MSS., and I doubt not that others would
coincide, if there should be a fresh and more accurate collation
of Latin MSS. on the place ; 8) many editions of the Vulgate
on the margin, before those of Sixtus and Clement ; 9) the pure
version of Jerome in the Bibliotheca Divina, edited by the
Benedictines of S. Maur, Opp. T. 1 ; 10) Jerome, who, besides
his version, reads Ipse in his Quaestt. Heb., on Ezek, xlvii, on
6 Varr. Lectt. Vet. Test. Vol. iv. App. pp. 208, 209.
reading " Ipsa " should be corrected. 387
Isa. Iviii ; 11) Irenseus [iv. 40 ; v. 21], Cyprian [Test. ii. 9],
Lucifer Calaritanus [Bibl. P. iv. 182], Chrysostomus [Horn,
xvii. in Gen. n. 7, Opp. iv. 143.], Petrus Chrysologus [Bibl.
Pair. vii. 976. H.], Eucherius [B. P. vi. 834, H.], Procopius
Gaza3us [ad loc. p. 70], S. Leo [Serm. ii. in Nat. Dom. p. 67],
also Moses Bar Cepha [De Paradiso, P. i. cap. 28, p. 157, ed.
Mas.], S. Ephr. Syr. [ad loc.], and all the Fathers who used
the Greek or Syriac; 12) lastly, the masculine reading is
better, by which the bruising of the serpent is ascribed im-
mediately and alone to the Seed of the woman, and from
which the redemption, power, Divinity of the Messiah are
plainly elicited.
" Which original authorities and witnesses, being most ex-
ceedingly grave and insurmountable, evidently demonstrate
that the true reading of the sacred text is Kin, hu, ipse,
ipsum : and countless Catholic authors, both before and since
the Council of Trent, follow this reading as the truer, and
prefer it to the feminine."
He enumerates thirty-five, refers to "others"
generally, adding that the words of most of them,
and the places where they occur, are given by
Coster 6 and Natalis Alexander 7. De Rossi sums
up,-
" 8 To whomsoever, then, the present reading of the Yulgate
belongs, whether to the interpreter, or (which is more pro-
bable) to the amanuensis, it ought to be amended from the
Hebrew and Greek fountain-heads, and to be referred (as I
have said formerly, ' De praecipuis causis negl. hebr. litt.' p. 94)
to those passages of the Clementine edition, which yet can and
ought to be conformed to the Hebrew text, and to be amended
by the authority of the Church."
' Vindex loci Gen. iii. 15 c. xi.
T Hist. Eccl. Diss. xl. T. viii. p. 271.
1 1. c. p. 211.
B b 2
388 Perrone's argt., that sense the same, fails.
Perrone, indeed, would have it " that it is all
one, whether you read ipsa, or ipse, or ipsum,"
[i. e. whether it is foretold that the B.V., or
Christ, or the Seed of the woman should bruise
the serpent's head] —
" 9 For since the woman, not by her own power, but by the
merits of her Son, was to bruise the head of the serpent or the
devil, if it shall be read ipsa, it is to be understood ' through
Him,' i. e. the Seed, or the Son ; but if ipse or ipsum, the
meaning will be, that the Son or Seed of the woman, together
with the woman, should bruise the head of the serpent or the
devil. But analogy seems rather to favour the woman than
the Seed ; or, if any prefer it, to both together ; so that the
woman with her Seed, i. e. her Son, was to triumph over
the devil and sin."
But the text speaks of none but " the Seed of the
woman." It speaks of our Lord's direct and per-
sonal crushing of the serpent's head. He was " the
Seed of the woman ;" but the crushing is ascribed,
not to her, nor to Him in conjunction with her, but
to Him Alone. The argument, then, for the Im-
maculate Conception, derived from the passage,
being, that " She who was said to crush Satan could
never have been, for a moment, even in her mother's
womb, under original sin;" the major premiss of
the argument is gone, when it appears that nothing
is said here of any personal victory of hers. It was
God Incarnate, not any mere human being, Who
crushed our enemy, though, thereafter, He has and
shall crush him under our feet also.
9 Imm. Cone. P. i. c. 9 (Pareri, pp. 366, 367).
Parallel between B. V. and Eve. 339
V. There is yet one Patristic evidence of Perrone,
which has seemed to you too, my dear friend, satisfac-
tory as to the one side of original sin, the transmission
of the guilt, viz. the parallel drawn by some of the
Fathers between the Blessed Virgin and Eve. I can-
not (although I should wish to do so) see its force. It
was, indeed, part of God's marvellous condescension
in our redemption, that since man and woman,
our first parents, fell, He willed to give to both a
place in our redemption, in that He who was
" Very God " became " Very Man/' and was, as
Holy Scripture emphasizes it, " born of a woman."
And this He did, first engracing her, of whom He
vouchsafed to be born. The quotations which you
give from the Fathers, are most valid against that,
which you somehow thought that I held, that " the
Blessed Virgin was only a physical instrument in
our redemption." And, of course, she could be a
"moral instrument" only through Divine grace.
But then we must not, I think, stretch the parallel
drawn by the Fathers beyond what they themselves
say. Nay, contrariwise, their agreement up to a
certain point, and their uniform omission of some-
thing which lies beyond that point, seems to me to
imply, that they had not that other point in their
minds. If they had had it, why should no one
of them have expressed it ? The correspondence
indeed between S. Justin, S. Irenseus, Tertullian,
is so exact, that I cannot but think here (what
in some other points I have been obliged, some
390 Full parallel and contrast of Mary and Eve
time since, against my will, to think), that they are
not independent witnesses, but that S. Irenseus had
seen S. Justin's works, Tertullian, those of one or
both of his predecessors. All three insist on these
points of correspondence or of contrast; that each,
Eve and Mary, was a virgin ; that the one believed
the serpent, the other the Angel; the one was
disobedient, the other obedient : through the one
came death, through the other life, in that, on her
faith and obedience she bare God within her, the
Author of life. And in these points, the other
Fathers agree with more or less of fulness ; S. Cyril
of Jerusalem, S. Ephraim, S. Epiphanius, S. Augus-
tine, S. Peter Chrysologus, S. Fulgentius of Euspe.
But then, it is even remarkable that while, as you
say, these Fathers dwell on the graces of the Blessed
Virgin, her faith, joy, obedience, graces of a soul
pre-eminent in grace, not one has the most distant
allusion to the question, when that eminent sanc-
tification began in her. They set her before us, in
that moment of her life for which God created her,
when Eve's disobedience and our curse were about
to be undone through her obedience, and she was
to become, to herself and to the whole human race,
the cause of salvation by becoming the Mother of
the Saviour. How she became fitted for that
office, they are as silent as Scripture itself. They
betoken a traditional parallel between Eve and
Mary, in those points, wherein they contrast them;
they imply an entire unconsciousness of any other
rather exclude what is omitted. 391
parallel; and the minuteness of the one series of
parallels or contrasts makes it almost certain that
they would have added that of their being, in their first
and earliest origin, — the first moment, not of birth,
or of conscious existence, but in the first original
of their being, — alike free from original sin, alike
clothed in that original righteousness, had they
inherited the belief from the Apostles or from the
Blessed Virgin herself. Nay more, the context
rather implies that, up to the Incarnation, the full
effects of Eve's disobedience continued, of which
the transmission of original sin was the centre and
the mainspring.
I intended nothing less, when I began this letter,
than such an investigation as this, which I have
now concluded. Yet it seemed to me to be for the
interest of truth, to have the whole case before us.
What I desire is, such an explanation of the doc-
trine as we could receive, made authoritatively.
I trust that, in some way or other, one side of the
doctrine only has been presented in the Bull " In-
effabilis." And in order to obtain some such ex-
planation, I have put the difficulty in regard to the
tradition in its full force. To some of your con-
troversialists this will seem simply polemical. They
will think it a mere contumacious re-opening of
the question, decided for the Roman Communion
by the tacit acquiescence in the Bull "Ineffabilis.",
392 Object of this statement of evidence.
Others, I hope, will see that what I have written
has a twofold aspect. Among my own people, it
will tend to lead many to think upon a subject,
which does not ordinarily occupy their thoughts.
And reflection will, I think, bring them to believe,
what was believed on this subject by S. Bona-
ventura. For no one, who thinks, can well doubt
that as much (if not more) was vouchsafed to the
Mother of his Redeemer, as was granted to Jere-
miah or S. John Baptist. Since then they were,
according to Holy Scripture, sanctified in their
mother's womb, it is intrinsically probable that so
was the Blessed Virgin, because she had a nearness
to our Lord, such as no other created being could
have. Although then (as some of the older of
those who maintain it say) not stated in Holy
Scripture, it seems almost involved in the belief
as to Jeremiah and S. John Baptist, which is so
contained. It will, I trust, be a gain to our own
people, to have had the subject thus brought be-
fore them, since the very dwelling on the negative
side, — the difficulties as to the Immaculate Con-
ception,— brings with it a necessity of dwelling on
the positive side, the greatness of the Blessed Virgin
herself, the wondrousness of the graces vouchsafed
to her, the probability of her exemption from actual
sin. The question itself was brought down almost
to a point by the later Schoolmen ; but that point
involved the whole doctrine of the transmission of
original sin, whether it were transmitted to all
Difficulties. 393
who were conceived in the natural way of our dis-
ordered nature. The tradition on this subject
constitutes the difficulty, that it is so often stated,
in such a long tradition, that Christ Alone was
born without sin, because He Alone was born by a
Virgin-birth. Other grounds, that the Blessed
Virgin, unless born in original sin, would not be of
the number of Christ's redeemed, would not have
needed redemption, are met in that Bull, which
affirms that she was exempted " on the ground of
the foreseen merits of Christ." If it could be laid
down by authority, that all which was meant by
the Bull was, that "to the Blessed Virgin grace
came, not three months merely before her birth,
[as to S. John Baptist] but from the first moment
of her being, as it had been given to Eve," much
misgiving as to the doctrine would cease.
Difficulty would still remain as to the tradition,
what the Fathers did mean by all that concurrent
testimony. Your Divines, as well as ours, are
interested in the maintenance of the uquod ubi-
que, quod semper, quod ab omnibus." It is a great
principle of fixity amid fleeting opinions and here-
sies. It is the very principle, stringently laid
down in the Tridentine doctrine of Tradition.
Antecedently to the decision, several of your
Bishops expressed themselves concerned, lest the
value of that principle should be endangered. The
facts remain as before, and need explanation as
before. Such concordant testimony must have a
394 Acknowledged importance of the
solid meaning. It will not meet the exigencies of
the case, to state simply that they do not con-
tradict the Bull "Ineffabilis." Members of the
Roman Communion must have full confidence as
to this. But the question is, in what way it does
not. It does not, I think, meet the case, to say that
the writers were speaking generally only, as to what
the Blessed Virgin would have been subject to,
had she not been exempted. For they are speak-
ing, not of principles, but of facts, why our Lord
only was conceived without sin. The prerogative
of the Blessed Virgin, according to some, has a
relation to that of her Divine Son; that as He
Alone, of all human sons, was conceived without sin
in Him, so she was the only mother who conceived
one without sin, — not of her own, for conception,
sanctified by grace, has no sin in the parents, but —
sin transmitted to the child.
Some, indeed, of your Bishops (with all respect
to them) made short work of the Vincentian rule.
To them it seemed sufficient evidence of an Apos-
tolic tradition, that the doctrine was (though with-
out the direct authority of the Church) taught
every where at that time. They held that this
agreement of its priests in teaching the doctrine
so committed the Church, that, if the doctrine
were only a pious opinion, not a certain truth, the
Church would be involved in error, if her separate
and individual teachers taught it as certain truth.
In the old terms of Vincentius, the " quod ubi-
Vincentian rule, " Quod ubique" fyc. 395
que " and " quod semper " ceased to be two con-
current marks of genuine traditions. According
to these Bishops, in order to establish that any
belief rested on genuine tradition, it needed not to
show that it had been " always " taught : it suf-
ficed that it should be taught, at this moment,
"every where" in the Koman communion. In
their minds, the " quod ubique " in itself involved
the "quod semper." Others, of a stricter school,
insisted on the necessity that, for any thing which
should be constituted an Article of Faith, there
should be evidence that it had " always " been
taught. They, like our own Divines, required the
" quod semper " as well as the " quod ubique,"
and, thus far, agreed with us. This was laid down
with great clearness, among others, by the Bishop
of Cervia; "That saying of Vincent of Lerins
must move me, received as a rule by all Theo-
logians and constantly observed, whenever it was
the question of distinguishing or defining dogmas
of faith, 'what was always, every where, by all,
received as a dogma of faith, and has been believed
till now/ Every Catholic dogma, being a fact
manifest to us by Divine revelation, can neither
be known or proved, save by the Word of God,
written or handed down ; and since God could,
either expressly or implicitly, by Scripture or tra-
dition, reveal a truth unattainable by human in-
tellect or reason, the Church never proposes as a
dogma to be received and believed by all under
396 Bp. of Cervia, and others, on the " Quod ub"
pain of anathema or heresy, unless it be contained
explicitly, or at least implicitly, in the Word of
God, written or handed down. But some Theolo-
gians contend that this could scarcely be affirmed
as to the proposed truth. For had it been ex-
pressly or implicitly revealed in Scripture or tra-
dition, how should older Fathers and Doctors,
Theologians, and the whole order of Dominicans,
and the whole school of the Thomists, not only be
ignorant of it, but venture with all their might
and vehement abundance of argument to assail it,
o /
the Supreme Pontiffs conniving, or at least not
condemning as heretics those who for many ages
opposed with their whole strength the Conception
immaculate at the first instant l ?"
1 Pareri ii. 217, 218. "Eirenicon," pp. 388, 389. The same
argument from the " quod semper," or the absence of tradition,
was used by the late Archbishop of Paris (Pareri ii. 26. Dub.
1, 2, 4. Eiren. p. 354) ; the late Abp. of Eouen (Par. i. 357.
Eir. p. 360); the late Bp. of Coutances ("could with the
greatest difficulty be derived from Holy Scripture or tradi-
tion,"—Par. i. 363. Eir. p. 362) ; the Bp. of Evreux (Par. i. 101.
Eir. p. 363) ; the Archbishop of Bourges, agreeing with his
Theologians (Par. i. 498. Eir. p. 368) ; the Abp. of Chain-
bery (Par. i. 411. Eir. p. 370) ; " the more erudite in Germany,"
reported by the Abp. of Bamberg (Par. ii. 59. Eir. p. 371) ;
the Abp. of Salzburg, as " an opinion fixed in the minds of
very many " (Par. i. 326. Eir. p. 374) ; the Bp. of Adria
(Par. i. 317. Eir. p. 385) ; the Bp. of Mondovi doubted (iii. 144.
Eir. p. 385); Bp. of Majorca at length (Par. ii. 157, sqq.
Eir. p. 392, sqq.) ; Bp. of Lugo (ii. 98. Eir. p. 396) ; " learned
theologians " quoted by Bp. of laca (Par. i. 480. Eir. p. 397) ;
some alluded to by the Bp. of Santander (Par. i. 424, 425.
Summary as to original sin. 397
So many and grave Bishops also held this con-
viction,— that in order to prove a tradition to be
Apostolic, it was requisite that the evidence should
be traceable, and that it did not suffice that it
should be taught at this moment " every where "
in the Koman Catholic Church, — that the rule of
Vincentius still, I suppose, has its supporters.
You say, that the difficulty lies in the difference
between the Catholic and Protestant doctrine of
original sin. I hope it may prove so. For then it
will not lie with us. The doctrine, as it has been
stated or applied by the writers whom I have
quoted so largely, comes to this, that the soul is
infected with original sin by its union with the
body, when conceived in the way of nature, which
(however good and pure the parents were) is in-
separable from concupiscence of nature; that, be-
fore the soul is infused into the body (whenever
that infusion may take place), there is neither good
nor evil, for there is only an irrational substance,
incapable of good or evil; that original sin is con-
tracted in the infusion of the rational soul ; that it
is transmitted to all who were in Adam, according
to the " ratio seminalis," and are conceived in the
Eir. pp. 398, 399) ; the Bp. of Chiapo, quoting Suarez,
S. Thomas, Petau, (Par. T. ix. App. i. 19, 20. Eir. pp. 399,
400) ; Vic. Ap. of Mysore (Par. iii. 353. Eir. p. 401) ; Y. Ap.
of Coimbatore (iii. 354, 355. Eir. pp. 402, 403) ; Y. A. of
Constantinople (Par. i. 266. Eir. p. 136) ; Y. A. of Patna
doubtful (Par. ii, 385. Eir. p. 137).
398 English and Tridentine statements on
way of our disordered nature. S. Thomas dis-
tinguished, further, the material and formal .causes
of original sin ; the formal, upon which you have
chiefly dwelt, viz. " the privation of original
righteousness, it heing incumbent upon us to have
it;" and the material, viz. " concupiscence, or
the inordination of the soul," to which you allude
under the term, "the consequences of that de-
privation." Our Article contains the same doc-
trine as to its transmission, " of every man, that
naturally is engendered of the offspring of Adam ;"
it states the loss of " original righteousness ;" but
it dwells chiefly on that, with which we, who are
baptized, have alone to do, the phronema sarkos,
the concupiscence, which " remains in us who are
regenerated." Ever since I have been acquainted
with the Council of Trent, I have been convinced
that the doctrine stated in our Articles, while it is
opposed to that of Luther and Calvin, virtually
agrees with that of the Council of Trent, in that it
presents only a different aspect of the same truth.
For our Article which states that " the concu-
piscence, which remains in the regenerate, has in
itself the nature of sin," is clearly at variance with
statements, which were the object of the condemna-
tion of the Council of Trent, such as, that " 2 sin is
of the essence of man;" or more strongly, that
2 Luth. in Gen. iii. quoted by Mohler, Symbol, i. 6. p. 72
[p. 84 Eng. Tr.].
orig. sin contrasted with Luther's and Calvin's. 399
" 3 the essence of man is sin ;" that " 3 the nature
of man is to sin," " 3 man himself is sin ;" that
u original sin is that very thing which is born
of father and mother;" that "4the conception
and the growth and the accretion of man, while
he is in his mother's womb and is not yet
born, before we altogether become human beings 5,
— that is, all, one with another, sin;" that "man,
as he is born of his father and mother, to-
gether with his whole nature and essence, is not
only a sinner, but sin itself;" or that " ' 6 concu-
piscence ' [the Patristic word adopted in our
Articles] was not so very alien a word, if only it
were added (which is not allowed by most: viz.,
Catholics) that whatever is in man is sin, that
from the intellect to the will, from the soul to the
flesh, he is stained and filled with this concu-
piscence." But our Article only presents a dif-
ferent aspect of the doctrine of Trent. The
Council had to condemn the error of Luther,
that concupiscence was truly and properly sin;
but plainly it would not have used the term u truly
and properly sin," unless it had held that it had
something of sin about it. The English Church,
on the other hand, would not have used the words,
3 Sayings of Luther, collected and excused by Quenstedt,
Theol. did. polem. P. ii. pp. 134, 135, Witt. 1669, quoted by
Mohler. Ib. p. 74 [p. 86 Eng. Tr.].
4 Der 51 Ps. P. ii. "Witt. 1539, German by G. Major.
6 "Ehe wir rechte Menschen sind."
6 Calv. Inst. ii. 1. 8, Ib. p. 62 [108 Eng. Tr.].
400 Tridentine doctrine on original sin.
"the nature of sin," had it meant that it was
" truly sin 7."
But I know that our people have not observed
the expression, " deprivation " (viz. " of that
supernatural unmerited grace which Adam and
Eve had on their creation ") " and its conse-
quences-" and hence they have thought your
statements of original sin novel (at least of late
years) and inadequate. They would not have
thought so, had they remembered the words of
the Council of Trent, which condemns, under
anathema, " any who does not confess that the
whole Adam was changed for the worse in body
and soul," and that " this sin of Adam, which in
origin is one, is transfused into all by propagation,
not by imitation ;" that " all men by the disobedi-
ence of Adam lost innocence, being made unclean,
7 "The Holy Synod confesses and is sensible, that in the
baptized there remains concupiscence, or an incentive [fomes]
(to sin), which, whereas it is left for our exercise, cannot injure
those who consent not, but resist manfully by the grace of
Jesus Christ ; yea, he who shall have ' striven lawfully ' shall
be crowned. This concupiscence, which the Apostle some-
times calls sin (Rom. vi. viii.), the holy Synod declares that the
Catholic Church has never understood to be called sin, as
being truly and properly sin in those born again, but because
it is of sin, and inclines to sin." Cone. Trid. Sess. v. n. 5,
p. 24 Waterw. Tr. " This infection of nature doth remain, yea,
in them that are regenerated, whereby the lust of the flesh
is not subject to the law of God. And although there is
no condemnation for them that believe and are baptized, yet
the Apostle doth confess, that concupiscence and lust hath, in
itself, the nature of sin." Art. ix.
How original sin transmitted, a mystery. 401
and, as the Apostle says, ' by nature children of
wrath/ servants of sin and under the power of
the devil and of death ;" that " free will was not
indeed extinguished in them, hut was weakened
and bound," For this you included under the
words, " its consequences." For if Adam's sin had
only involved the " deprivation of supernatural
unmerited grace " (as these understood you to
mean), then our re-creation in Christ would have
entirely effaced the 'evil effects of the fall, since we
are brought into a closer nearness to God, being
made members of His Son, than Adam was, when
invested with the robe of original righteousness.
While the transmission of original sin is certain,
clear from Holy Scripture, from uniform Christian
tradition, from nature itself, the mode of its trans-
mission is, I believe, an inscrutable mystery, in-
soluble by man. The "privation of original
righteousness " does not, by itself, account for all
the phenomena. " Who," asks Mohler, " compre-
hends evil in itself? Who has ever penetrated
that deep connexion between moral and physical
evil ? Who has explored the bands which unite
body and soul ? Who knows the relation of the
sexes, and can tell what is life and the generation
of life8?" Mohler points out the inadequacy of
every attempt to solve it. Traducianism, i. e. the
derivation of soul from soul, would have given an
8 Symbolik, c. 2, § 5, p. 63.
c c
402 Difficulties in each way of explaining
easy solution. S. Augustine, while owning his igno-
rance, leant towards it, apparently on that ground.
The Church has held it to be too material. On the
belief that each soul is created anew, and, of course,
created pure by God when He infuses it into the
body, Mohler points out the difficulties of the two
chief theories, either that, — 1 ) "by the fall of Adam,
a destructive, infectious quality was introduced into
the body, which, propagated through generation,
seized on the soul at the moment of its union with
the body, drew it down to itself, and imparted dis-
order to it;" or, — 2) "that fallen man, apart from
the hereditary guilt, was born just as Adam, con-
sidered without supernatural gifts, i. e. with all
natural properties, powers, and qualities of the
paradisaic man, as also without any quality in
itself evil ;" and " that the evil of the corrupt con-
dition in which man is now born, is to be regarded
as this, that in Adam he deserved to be deprived of
that righteousness, which was bestowed on him
through the supernatural gift of grace, i. e. to feel
the rebellion of the flesh against the spirit. What
nature would have been, without the supernatural
gift of grace, that is, on account of the self-in-
curred loss of this gift, the punishment of all born
of Adam."
To the former, Mohler objects, that —
" Apart from the fact that the origination of a positive evil
quality is itself an enigma, nay inconceivable, this explanation
represented evil as something very material." "How," he
transmission of original sin. 403
asks, " could the propagation of such a material poison impart
to the spirit the elements of all that, which constitutes self-
seeking in its whole vast compass — rebellion against God, pride
and envy towards men, vanity and self-complacency in him-
self?"
To the second he objects, —
" In that this theory does not explain and cannot explain
the perversity of will wherewith we are born, it too is unsatis-
factory. It speaks only of a conflict between the sensual and
the rational principle, which, without that which was Divine,
would have occurred as an event of nature. But the question,
above all others, is, to explain the wounds of the spirit, espe-
cially the perversity of the will. Would the spirit of man,
simply because it is an essence distinct from God, considered
in itself, — i. e. without the supernatural gift of grace, — as a
naked finite being, stand in that position over against God and
all which is holy, in which man is now born ? Then would
man, as a finite being, be of himself inclined to sin, and he would
not first become so through misuse of his freedom. The
supernatural Divine principle can assuredly not have as its
destination, to remove the inclination, existing in man as a
creature, to opposition to its Creator, or rather merely to
hinder its coming to an outbreak. Through the absence of
this supernatural gift of grace, without which all are now
born, man is not as yet perverted in will : he may become so,
and will without doubt readily become so ; but in the moment
of his formation he is not."
The two theories, then, appear to me to have
exactly the same difficulty; viz. how the soul,
created pure by God, should, in the first beginning
of its existence, before the use of reason, have in
itself the disposition to evil. A child, a few
months old, will wilfully bite the mother who is
c c 2
404 Innocent III. on the
nursing him 9. What I thought to be the meaning
of those writers who dwell so much on concu-
piscence as the channel of the transmission of ori-
ginal sin, was, that the passion of nature which,
in consequence of Adam's sin, became, in some
degree (however sanctified by grace to the parents),
an absolutely necessary condition of the repro-
duction of our race, became also the means of
disordering the body and, through it, the soul.
Pope Innocent III. expresses this more concisely
in a work which he wrote, as a Deacon, the " De
Contemptu Mundi," than he did in one written
amid the cares and distractions of the Papacy ',
his " Comment on the Penitential Psalms," in which,
however, he expands his former statement, writing,
as he hoped, " Himself inspiring, Whose Spirit
bloweth where It listeth." It is the work of a
9 Of course, such a child could not altogether know what it
was doing ; yet he never did it when his mother's eye was on
him : he left off, when she again looked at him.
1 He begins his Preface to his Commentary on the Peni-
tential Psalms, " Lest, amid the manifold occupations and
vehement anxieties which I endure beyond my strength, not
only from the cares of rule, but also from the malice of the
times, I should be wholly swallowed up by the deep, I gladly
steal from myself some brief hours, wherein, in order to recall
my spirit to itself, lest it should be altogether divided and
alienated from itself, it may meditate something in the law of
the Lord, which may profit hereto, Himself inspiring, Whose
Spirit bloweth where It listetb, that I may not evermore be
so made over to others, as never to be restored to myself," &c.
Opp. i. 208.
transmission of original sin. 405
remarkable Pope, who was elected at thirty-seven ;
and, although all good thoughts come from God's
holy inspiration, such words, I suppose, make what
is so written a somewhat formal teaching of the
Pope. His object in the passage of the " De Con-
temptu Mundi " was to inspire humility, on the
ground of the original of man. He supposes a
person to think better of himself so far, in that he
was not made directly of the dust, as Adam was.
He answers, —
" 2 Yet Tie was formed from earth, but that, virgin earth ;
thou wert procreated from seed, but that unclean. For ' who
can make that clean, which is conceived of unclean seed?'
For c what is man, that he should be spotless, or how should
he appear righteous, who was born of a woman?' For 'be-
hold, I was conceived in iniquities, and in sins did my mother
conceive me.' Not in one iniquity only, nor in one delin-
quency only, but in many iniquities and in many delinquen-
cies; in delinquencies and iniquities of mine own; in de-
linquencies and iniquities of others. For conception is twofold ;
one of seeds, the other of natures. The first takes place in
[faults 8] committed, the second takes place in [faults] con-
2 De Contemptu Mundi, L. i. cc. 3, 4. T. i. p. 422.
8 In his comment on Ps. li., where Innocent repeats the
passage, nearly verbally, expanding it here and there, he words
it, "The parents commit actual fault [actualem culpam] in the
first, and the offspring contracts original fault [originalem] in
the second ; wherefore he says, For lo ! 'I was conceived in
iniquities,' which, in the conception of seeds, my parents com-
mitted ; * and my mother conceived me in delinquencies,' which,
in the conception of nature, I myself contracted. Far be the
thought, that it should be said on this occasion that David
was conceived in adultery, since Jesse, his father, begat him of
his lawful wife." T. i. p. 268.
406 Doctrine of Innocent III.
tracted. For the parents commit [fault] in. the first; the
offspring contracts [original fault] in the second. For who
knows not, that even conjugal concumbency is never altogether
committed * sine pruritu carnis, sine fervore luxuriae, sine
foetore libidinis.' Whence the seeds conceived are denied,
stained, and vitiated ; from which [seeds 4] the soul, at length
infused, contracts the defilement of sin, the stain of fault, the
filth of iniquity ; as from a corrupted vessel liquid poured in
is corrupted, and, coming in contact with what is polluted,
is polluted by the very contact. For the soul has three natural
powers — the rational, that it may discern between good and
evil ; the irascible, that it may reject evil ; the concupiscible,
that it may desire good. Those three powers are corrupted in
the origin itself [originaliter] by three opposite vices. The
reasoning power by ignorance, that it should not distinguish
between good and evil. The irascible power by anger, that it
should reject good. The concupiscible power by concupiscence,
that it should desire evil. The first generates delinquency;
the last bringeth forth sin ; the middle generates both delin-
quency and sin. For delinquency is, not to do what ought to
be done ; sin is, to do what is not to be done. These three
faults are contracted from the corrupted flesh, through three
natural entanglements. For in carnal intercourse, the percep-
tion of reason is laid asleep, so that ignorance should be pro-
pagated ; the irritation of lust is stimulated, so that anger is
propagated ; the feeling of pleasure is satiated, so that concu-
piscence is contracted. This is the tyrant of the flesh, the
4 " Ex quibus," the only antecedent being " seminibus."
On Ps. 51, it is " ex seminibus ergo foedatis atque corruptis,
there is conceived a body in like way fouled and corrupted,
whereinto the soul at length infused is corrupted and fouled,
not from the integrity and cleanness which it had, but from
the integrity and cleanness which it would have, if it were not
united to a body fouled and corrupted, since it is both infused
by creating and created by infusing. For as from a cor-
rupted," &c. as in text. Ib.
possible basis of explanation. 407
law of the members, the incentive of sin, the sickness of
nature, the nutriment of death, without which no one is born,
without which no one dies, which, if ever it passes away as to
guilt, yet ever remains in act. For ' if we say, that we have
no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.'
Oh, heavy necessity, unhappy condition ! Before we sin, we
are bound by sin; and before we fail [delinquimus], we are
held by delinquency. 'By one man sin entered into this
world, and through sin death passes upon all men.' * Have
not the fathers eaten the sour grapes, and the children's teeth
are set on edge ?'"
Perhaps this doctrine of Pope Innocent III.
would afford an easier and more natural solution
of much of the traditional language, than that of
the Scotists, that " original sin is only the absence
of original righteousness in those who ought to
have it." For, according to that doctrine, there
is nothing in the human being which has to be
remedied ; nothing which should make it other
than Almighty God originally willed it to be.
Almighty God has not, indeed, bestowed upon it
any gift to replace that gift of original righte-
ousness which Adam forfeited for us; but neither
is there any scope for that gift, until the
child, being born, have a choice of good or evil.
There is nothing, according to this doctrine, in-
herent in the child itself ; and so, in the con-
ception of the B.V., on this theory there was
nothing to be removed, but only a superadded gift
of grace to be added (analogous to the gift in
infant baptism) which should be equivalent to,
yea exceed as to Divine acceptance, that original
408 Innocent III. and (not yet Pope) Clement VI.
gift of righteousness. On the doctrine of Pope
Innocent III,, original sin did, in the language
of Pope Clement VI., exist in the Blessed Virgin
"in the cause;" and therefore, there was not
only something from which she had to be "pre-
served," but something also which was to be
removed from her inchoate being. This would allow
a natural sense to be given to those expressions,
"freed," "delivered," &c., which, as was noticed
above by several writers, imply the actual existence
of something from which she was delivered. It
would allow also of a meaning to those many pas-
sages, in which the Fathers contrast the Virgin-
Conception of her Son with her own, in that in
His Conception there was no concupiscence, whereas
in hers there was. For that doctrine of Innocent
III. presupposes that, through that concupiscence,
something disordering was transmitted, which, un-
less it were removed, would infect the soul. And
this disordering would, again, be something posi-
tive to be removed. In whatever way the tradition
be accounted for, the difficulty as to the doctrine of
transmission of original sin to all conceived as she
too was, would be removed by the acknowledgment,
in Pope Clement VI. 's language, that " the B. V.
had original sin in the cause."
It is still, I think, an open question whether the
material cause of original sin remained in the
B.V., in regard to which S. Thomas says5, that the
6 3 p. q,27. art. 3.
The "fames peccati" or concupiscence. 409
incentive to sin [fomes peccati, " concupiscence"]
was "bound" in the B.V. when she was sanctified
in her mother's womb, so that it should not burst
forth into actual sin, but that it was " wholly with-
drawn" from her by the overshadowing of the Holy
Ghost at the Annunciation, " in the Conception
of the Flesh of Christ, wherein her immunity from
sin ought to be reflected, redounding from her
Child to the mother."
I must make up my mind, as before, that your
controversialists will censure details, give sweeping
answers, speak of my accusing the Church of God,
and the like. As far as I myself am concerned,
this is not hard to bear; for, with the judgment-
seat of Christ so near at hand, human praise or
blame are but a breath, except as they dispose or
indispose men's minds to long for that blessed re-
union of Christendom, for which all would long, if
they did but hope it. But this sort of controversy
does not tend to heal deep wounds. It rather
aggravates them. It may serve its temporary end
of raising in some minds suspicions as to myself.
It will leave things in the main as before. This
difficulty lies deep in thoughtful minds. Happy he
who could remove it !
And now let me, in closing this long letter, revert
to that subject, with which I set out, the expostula-
tion, with which you close yours, " 6 Have you not
been touching us on a very tender point in a very
8 Letter, p. 121.
410 Exceptions only to what is not " dejide"
rude way ? Is not the effect of what you have said
to expose her to scorn and obloquy, who is dearer
to us than any other creature ? " God forbid ! I
have not spoken, I trust, any thing which could be
construed into derogation of her, who is the Mother
of Jesus, my Lord and God. I have not spoken, as
those fathers spake, for whom you apologize and
whose language you explain. I could neither use
it nor cite it, and I marvel that they used it. I
meant to speak only of an office, popularly assigned
to her, but of which the Roman Communion too
has, I believe, pronounced nothing to be " of faith."
They are not any expressions of love, or reverence,
or admiration, which I have stated to be our diffi-
culties. I know not how any could be too great, if
they had not a dogmatic basis, beyond what we
believe God to have revealed. And here too,
if God had clearly revealed, what some among
you believe, there would be no further question,
just as we who believe that God has given autho-
rity to the priest to pronounce forgiveness in His
Name, and that He Himself confirms to the peni-
tent what is so pronounced in His Name, do not
think that the priest comes between us and God ;
and we know that we ourselves are wrongly accused
of " substituting the Sacraments for Christ," i. e.
the modes of His operation, or, in the Holy Eucha-
rist, His Presence, for Himself.
But, negatively, I own that we have been in this
respect in an unnatural state. Our hearts have
English feeling, why cramped. 411
been cramped. We have not, many of us, been
able to give full scope to our feelings, nor have
ventured to dwell on the mysteries connected with
the Mother of our Lord and God. I know not
whether you found it so when among us, that even
your tender heart dared not pour out its tenderness,
just in this special subject, where it would flow
most naturally. I know not, and do not wish to
draw out any thing from your heart's sanctuary.
If it was not so, you were, in this too, an exception.
Most of us seem to look on a wide sea before us,
with strong tides and eddies and currents, and we
see that these carry off others, whither we dare not
follow, and so we stop short and thrust not out from
the land. Habitually, I suppose, we gaze on our
Dear Lord on the Cross, and scarce dare think of
the sword which pierced His Mother's soul, and
enhanced His grief. Perhaps, we are taken up
with our own sins, and the Price which He paid
for our souls then, and our fresh crucifixion of Him,
and how our sins pierced Him; and so it comes
most natural to us, to think more on S. Mary
Magdalene there, as being most like us and a
pattern for us, and emboldening us to touch His
sacred Cross, or cling to His Sacred Feet. Or,
hearts of love have again dwelt, perhaps, more on
the Disciple whom Jesus loved, whose Divine Gos-
pel reveals to us so much of His Love, than on His
Holy Mother, because they have felt safer thus, and
no one has claimed that Apostles should be our one
412 LovEjfor the B. V. cannot be too great.
way and access to Him. As I said at the outset,
this is, I believe, our one fear. But as usual, the
fear passed its bounds, and men — I mean, of course,
not Protestants, but those who have dwelt on the
unfathomable mystery of the Incarnation and con-
fess what lies in the word Theotokos, and in what
we daily say to our Lord and God, *4 When Thou
didst vouchsafe to deliver man, Thou didst not ab-
hor the Virgin's womb," — hold back from thinking
of the rest of her life, not out of want of reverence
or love for her, but for the fear of what is de-
manded in her name. Faber, in those lines which
you quote, and in which he expresses so tenderly
his love for her 7, must have had a different class of
minds before him. Plainly, we could not love too
much her, from whom Jesus vouchsafed to receive a
mother's care, who loved Him, the All-Holy and
her Redeemer too, as no other mother could love
her son ; whom He loved with a Divine, but also
with Deified human love ; love, with which no other
son could love his mother. The love of the mother
and Son were essentially different from all other
But scornful men have coldly said,
Thy love was leading me from Q-od ;
And yet in this I did but tread
The very path my Saviour trod.
They know but little of thy worth,
Who speak these heartless words to me ;
For what did Jesus love on earth
One half so tenderly as thee ?
Yearning towards her in English Church. 431
love, because He was her Son after the Flesh, but
also Almighty God. And that same love must
continue on now, only that her God-enabled power
of love, in the beatific vision of His Godhead, must
be unspeakably intensified. They are cold words
to say, that it is not the amount of love for the
mother of our Redeemer and our God (how could
it be ?), but the mode of its expression, to which
any of us have objected.
And the more we can be set free from this fear
(as your words help thereto, should they prevail, by
God's blessing, and be heard among your people),
the more you will promote the love and honour of
her, whom, next to Jesus and for the sake of Jesus,
your own soul loves.
There is an earnest of this in writers among us
of very different characters of mind, as the pious
and affectionate Bishop Hall, notwithstanding his
Puritan descent, or the exact and theological Bishop
Pearson, or the learned but controversial Bishop
Hickes, or our dear departed friend's predecessor
in sacred poetry, the pious, learned, and imaginative
George Herbert. I might premise to these our good
Bishop Andrewes, who, in those devotions which,
after his departure, were found " moistened with his
pious tears," and which you aided to restore to us,
uses the prayer of the Greek Church, " Making
mention of the all-holy, undefiled, and more than
blessed Mary, Mother of God and ever-Virgin, with
all Saints, let us commend ourselves and each
414 Bp. Hall, Bp. Pearson.
other, and all our life to Christ our God8." He
who so prayed, must often have had her in his
thoughts.
Let me add the rest, not as denoting any de-
votedness, but as expressing this, that no love could
be too great, if it did not manifest itself in ways
which we think unallowed.
So Bishop Hall 9 :—
" But how gladly doe we second the Angell in the praise of
her, which was more ours than his! How justly doe we blesse
her, whom the Angell pronounceth blessed ! How worthily is
she honoured of men, whom the Angell proclaimeth beloved of
God! O blessed Mary, he cannot blesse thee, he cannot
honour thee too much, that deifies thee not ! That which the
Angell said of thee, thou hast prophesied of thy selfe; we
beleeve the Angell, and thee : ' All generations shall call thee
blessed,' by the Fruit of whose wombe all generations are
blessed."
And Bp. Pearson, who is recommended, I sup-
pose, by all our Bishops to be studied by candidates
for Holy Orders : —
" * The necessity of believing our Saviour thus to be ' born
of the Virgin Mary,' will appear both in respect of her who
was the mother, and of Him Who was the Son.
" In respect of her it was therefore necessary, that we might
perpetually preserve an esteem of her person, proportionable to
BO high a dignity. It was her own prediction, ' From hence-
forth all generations shall call me blessed ;' but the obligation
8 Tracts for the Times, No. 88, p. 60. Greek Lat. p. 132.
ed. 1828.
9 Contemplations, L. i., The Annunc. of Christ.
1 On the Creed, Art. 3, " Born of the Virgin Mary."
Bp. Hicks. 415
is ours, to call her, to esteem her so. If Elizabeth cried out
' with ' so ' loud a voice, Blessed art thou among women,' when
Christ was but newly conceived in her womb, what expressions
of honour and admiration can we think sufficient, now that
Christ is in heaven, and that mother with Him ? Far be it
from any Christian to derogate from that special privilege
granted her, which is incommunicable to any other. We can-
not bear too reverend a regard unto the ' mother of our Lord,'
so long as we give her not that worship which is due unto the
Lord Himself. Let us keep the language of the primitive
Church: "Let her be honoured and esteemed; let Him be
worshipped and adored."
Bishop, then Dr., Hicks, in a controversial tract,
expressly intended to enable persons to judge
" whether the Koman Catholics do indeed no more
than pray to the saints in heaven, as they do to
their brethren on earth, to pray for them in the
name and mediation of Jesus Christ," has such
passages as these following. There is poor language
throughout, yet there is also theological language
and theological inferences here and there, which
indicate how, but for this fear, he would have
spoken : —
" It may be showed in general that she was a very holy
person from the word KexaptTw/xcny, whether it be rendered,
* Thou that art highly favoured,' or ' Thou that art full of
grace.' It is not to be imagined that such an Angel should
be sent from God, to give such a title to any man or woman,
but who was a saint of the first rank. But it is much more
evident, that she was such an one from the matter of his mes-
sage or Annunciation, which was to tell her, that she should
conceive and bring forth Jesus, the Saviour of the world, and
8 S. Epiph. Haerea. Ixxix. § 7.
416 Bp. Hicks.
that ' the Holy Ghost ' to that end should ' come upon her,'
and that ' the Power of the Highest overshadow ' her; and that
the Holy Child, which should be born of her, should be the Son
of God. Certainly, the Holy Ghost would come upon none
but a pure saint ; He that affects the symbols of innocence and
purity, in all His appearances, and cannot 'enter into a malicious
soul, nor dwell in the body that is subject unto sin,' would not
have come in that manner and for that mighty purpose upon
any daughter of Adam, but who had ' cleansed herself from all
filthiness of flesh and spirit, and perfected holiness in the fear
of God.'
" Nay, God the Father, "Who was to prepare a Body for His
Eternal Son, as it is written, ' a Body hast Thou prepared Me,'
would not form it of the substance of a sinful woman ; but His
own essential Holiness, as well as the mysterious decency of the
dispensation, would prompt Him to form It of the substance of
one, that, like the king's daughter in the Psalm, was ' all-glorious
within,' and a pure and spotless Virgin, both in body and
mind. The fulness of the Godhead would not dwell bodily
in a wicked woman, nor would she be deceived and led
away by the serpent, whose heel was to bruise the serpent's
head. To be chosen for the Mother of God, was the greatest
honour and favour that ever God conferred upon any human
creature. None of the special honours and favours that He did
to any of the saints before or since are equivalent to the
honour of being the Mother of God. And, therefore we may
be sure that God Who said, ' Them that honour Me, I will
honour,' would not have done so great an honour to any
daughter of Abraham, but to one who best deserved it — who
had no superior for holiness upon earth. If we had no par-
ticular account of her graces, we might rationally conclude all
this of her from the history of our Lord's Incarnation ; for
nothing less than a superlative holiness could receive such a
testimony of Divine honour from the Holy Trinity. She was as
it were the spouse of God, Co-parent with Him of the wonder-
ful Immanuel, Who was God and man, « God of the substance
of the Father, begotten before the worlds ; and man of the
substance of His Holy Mother, born in the world/ « Perfect
God and perfect Man,' ' yet not two but one Christ.'
Greatness of the B. V. 417
" Though we read of no other graces in her [than purity,
humility, faith], yet we may be sure she had all the rest, that
could render her righteous and acceptable in the sight of God.
And therefore (3) It is our duty, who have the benefit of her
example, to honour and celebrate her name and commemorate
her virtues, and set forth her praises, in whom there was a con-
currence of so many Divine accomplishments, &c. If the names
of other saints are distinguished with miniature, hers ought to
shine with gold, especially, if we consider that she, of all the
virgin daughters of Israel, had the honour to be chosen by the
Holy Trinity for the mother of our Lord. ' What shall be done
to the woman, whom the King of kings delighteth to honour ?'
Certainly if we should hold our peace and refuse to praise her
among women, the stones of the Church would cry out, ' the
stone shall cry out of the wall, and the beam of the timber shall
answer it.' "Wheresoever the G-ospel is preached, that which
she hath done and suffered for our Lord ought to be spoken of
for a memorial of her, from whom He took that very Body
which was crucified, and that precious Blood which was shed
for the remission of our sin." Spec. B. Virg. Serm. T. 2,
pp. 65—72. London, 1713.
I may the rather add another name, because
little known; one who spent sixteen years as a
Confessor, in the times of the Republic. He may
be the better specimen of others now forgotten.
" 3 1 shall not need to tell you who this ' she,' or who this
3 Dr. Frank, Sermon on Christmas Day. " She brought
forth her first-born Son, and wrapped Him in swaddling clothes,
and laid Him in a manger." Sermons. T. i. p. 77. Ang.
Cath. Lib. " But if He would be born of a woman, could He
not have chosen another greater than ' she,' than a poor car-
penter's wife ? Some great queen or lady had been fitter for
to have been made, as it were, the Queen of heaven," &c.
Ib. p. 79.
D d
418 George Herbert.
1 Him.' The day rises with it in its wings. The day wrote it
with the first ray of the morning-sun upon the posts of
the world. The angels sung it in their choirs, the morning
stars together in their courses. The Virgin Mother, the
Eternal Son ! The most blessed among women, the fairest
of the sons of men. The woman clothed with the sun, the
Sun compassed with a woman ; she the gate of heaven ; He the
King of Glory, that came forth. She, the Mother of the ever-
lasting God : He, God without a mother ; God blessed for
evermore. Great persons as ever met upon a day."
You will appreciate the yearnings of George
Herbert : —
• " * I would address
My vows to thee most gladly, blessed Maid,
And mother of my God, in my distress.
" Thou art the holy mine, whence came the gold,
The great restoration for all decay
In young and old.
Thou art the cabinet where the jewel lay —
Chiefly to thee would I my soul unfold.
" But now, alas ! I dare not : for our King,
Whom we do all jointly adore and praise,
Bids no such thing :
And where His pleasure no injunction lays
('Tis your own case), ye never move a wing."
Whether our dear friend, from whom we have
been lately parted, did, in those early days, lay
a special emphasis on the exception, "All but
adoring love may claim," and meant thereby to
allow of any " love,7' except what involved " la-
treia" or the worship due to God alone, I never
4 George Herbert. The Church : To all Angels and Saints.
The Christian Year. 419
asked him, and I know not. Yet the exception,
strictly taken, is just that of Bp. Pearson, whom
he had studied. The beauty and tenderness of the
lines are all his own. Yet he, through whom God
so attuned men's hearts for the living belief of
truths, which at that time were held but too drily,
taught what he had learned from those before him.
How many hearts those words have spoken to,
cannot be told on earth.
" 5 Ave Maria ! Blessed Maid !
Lily of Eden's fragrant shade,
"Who can express the love,
That nurtured thee so pure and sweet,
Making thy heart a shelter meet
For Jesus' Holy Dove ?
" Ave Maria ! Mother blest,
To whom, caressing and caress'd,
Clings the Eternal Child :
Favour' d beyond Archangels' dream,
When first on thee with tenderest gleam
Thy new-born Saviour smiled.
" Ave Maria ! Thou whose name •» -l^i':
All but adoring love may claim,
Yet may we reach thy shrine ;
For He, thy Son and Saviour, vows
To crown all lowly lofty brows
With love and joy like thine."
With his words, then, I close. Pleasant and
mournful at once has it been thus publicly to write
to you, my dearest friend. I would rather have
written to you upon other subjects, than these
6 " The Christian Tear:" The Annunciation.
D d 2
420 Hopes.
which have occupied me; on my hopes for the
future ; on the terms upon which union might be
effected ; on articles which might be framed, which
the Roman Church could admit as sufficient, and
which, if our people could believe them to be suffi-
cient for so great an end as the re-union of Chris-
tendom, the practical English mind would look at
steadily in the face, and pray to God, and, by His
grace, embrace them. But it is a delicate matter
on your side (alas ! that I must use these terms), as
on ours. For there are in the Roman Communion
those who wish to exaggerate differences, who decry
" explanations " under the term of " concessions,"
who think that it is beneath its grandeur to enter
into negotiations with those whom they account as
rebels. There are too, who wish that the present
popular system should take deeper root and put
forth fresh germs, and who would regard us (loyal if
they were obliged to own us in matters of faith) an
" element of weakness," because we do not go along
with them in these devotions. What then I would
say on these subjects I must bring out, if so please
God, apart from your loved name. Shrinking as I
do from any thing like controversy with yourself, in
memory of those days when we took sweet counsel
together and walked in the house of God as friends,
and every thought, feeling, desire, longing of our
souls was one, I will enter into no topic which I
can help, which might expose you perhaps to sus-
picion, because you love me with the deep love of
Hopes. 421
your large loving heart, or which might occasion
a jar, where I long that all should be harmony. I
will then only accept your own almost parting
words, as expressing accurately my own convictions,
when you say to me, " 6 Whereas it was said twenty-
five years ago in the British Critic, ' Till Rome
ceases to be what practically she is, union is impos-
sible between her and England,' you declare on the
contrary, ' Union is possible, as soon as Italy and
England, having the same faith and the same
centre of unity, are allowed to hold severally their
own theological opinions.' '
I do think this. I do not think it necessary that
we should extend or contract our several systems
to one Procrustean length. Faith is one; and on
what is " of faith," we must be agreed. I think
that, not by " concessions " on your part, but by
mutual explanations as to what is u of faith," we
can be at one in all which is really " of faith," if
only, as to that large system which lies outside that
centre of faith, neither we have a quarrel with
you, because the majority of your people practically
hold it, nor you require of us, that, in case of re-
union, our people should be practically taught it.
"With God all things are possible." The
marvels of His past mercies are earnests of greater
marvels hereafter. The first crack of the ice is not
so sure a token of the coming thaw, as love, infused
by God, is of larger gifts of love. We have one
6 Letter, pp. 121, 122.
422 Hopes.
common Enemy. His instruments on" earth are
banded together at least by one common hatred of
the truth, which Jesus revealed or sealed, which
Apostles, taught by the Holy Ghost, proclaimed,
which the Church has, by a continuous succession,
taught, and which the Holy Ghost teaches in her.
Satan seems to have organized his armies more,
and to have learned from the Church the necessity
of union. Devil does not cast out devil. And
shall not we, who hold together the same body of
faith, who believe the same mysteries of the All-
Holy Trinity, of the Incarnation of our Lord and
God, of the operations of God the Holy Ghost in
man's regeneration and restoration, the same Word
of God, inspired by Him; the same offices of the
Ministry instituted by Him; the same authority
given to the Church to bear witness to, uphold,
maintain, transmit the same truth; the same Real
Presence of our Lord's Body and Blood, the same
Atoning Sacrifice of the Cross, the same pleading
of that One Meritorious Sacrifice on earth, as He,
our Great High Priest, evermore pleads It in
heaven — shall not we seek to be at one in the rest
too ? Shall we not seek and pray to understand
one another, require of each other the least which
fealty to our God requireth, that so — not as some
have misrepresented, through outward means, but
— through our united testimony to the truths re-
vealed to the Church, through our confession of
our God-given faith, through the might of union,
Hopes. 423
cemented by the One Holy Spirit of Love, we may
resist this swelling tide of unbelief, and win to the
truth, through the power of God, those who can be
won of its manifold opponents ? Shall the enemies
of the faith be united by their common hatred of
the faith, and we, who have the same faith, not be
united by our love of God Who gave it ? You, who
have so much of that love, will do what God shall
enable you; may He, in His mercy, grant that my
undeserts may not interfere with His work!
Yours most affectionately,
E, B. PUSEY.
CHRIST CHTJECH,
Feast of All Saints, 1866.
P. S. — I had begun a second Letter upon those
happier subjects, which I thought two years and
a half ago I must not address to you. But this
Letter has been so long delayed, amid doubt
whether to finish it at all, and the difficulty of
completing several things at once, that one object
of it — viz. to bring before the Bishops of the Eoman
Communion so much of the work of one of their
learned writers, Card, de Turrecremata, as I could,
before the approaching Council — would be lost by
waiting for the rest. I publish, then, this long-
written Letter, though with reluctance, because your
424 Card, de Turrecremata.
controversialists will think that my object in so
writing is simply controversial. The Cardinal's work
has been one more of the varied instances of human
labour, fruitless for this world. Written for the
Council of Basle, at the command of the Papal
legate its President; withdrawn with its author,
through the divisions of a thenceforth disallowed
Council, although needed to complete the case, on
one side of the question which the Council had to
decide upon, and which the residue of the Council,
now a Conciliabulum, did under the auspices of John
of Segovia, the chief proponent on the opposite side,
decide, without hearing it, while professing to have
heard both sides 7 ; then lying hid and neglected 8 for
110 years, and, after it was printed, notwithstanding
all its learning, almost as unknown as before. Alas
for human toil !
Lent, 1869.
7 "We, having diligently inspected the authorities and
grounds, which have been alleged now for many years in public
relations on the side of either doctrine before this sacred
synod, and have seen and weighed with mature consideration
many others on this matter," &c. — Cone. Bas. Sess. 36, Cone.
T. 17. p. 394. Col.
8 " A work so pure and conformable to Christian piety, that
there nowhere appears the darkness of human invention, or
any feeling for his own opinion, but every where there seemeth
to gleam the clear brightness of evangelic truth. A work very
necessary, but hitherto most rare, and also, through the unskil-
fulness of transcribers, bespread and deformed with countless
mistakes, it was wholly made over to neglect." — Pref. of Alb.
Duimius, Rome, 1547.
ON THE GREEK LITURGIES.
MY own studies not having lain in the Greek
Liturgies, I consulted my friend the Rev. G.
Williams, King's College, Cambridge, and append
some observations which he addresses to me. They
coincide with some which I had myself made as to
the appearance of interpolation on this very same
subject.
"It cannot, I think, be denied that the Orthodox Greek
Church does ' even surpass ' the Church of Rome ' in their
exaltation of the Blessed Virgin * ' in their devotions ; and
all that I can say is, that on this point the Orientals,
generally ' so jealous of antiquity,' have innovated on the prac-
tice of earlier and what we hold to be purer times. This, we
shall presently find, is mere matter of history.
" But when it is added that this practice has gone the length
of ' the substitution of the Name of Mary for the Name of
Jesus at the end of the collects and petitions ' in the Office
Books and 'in the formal prayers of the Greek Eucharistic
Service,' in which petitions are offered, not ' in the name of
Jesus Christ,' but ' of the Theotocos,' the statement seems to
me to require qualification ; for the word ' substitution ' would
1 Dr. Newman's Letter, p. 95.
426 Rev. G. Williams on
convey the impression to most minds that the name of ' Jesus
Christ ' had been removed to make way for that of the ' Blessed
Virgin,' which, of course, is a necessary element in the parallel
of the alteration of the ' Te Deum to her honour in private
devotion.'
" I am not aware that there is any proof of such substitution
or alteration of the pleadings in the prayers of the Greek
Church, although there is, as you know, distinct evidence of
the date of the introduction of those pleadings, and of the
author of that innovation ; for the last of the ' four most excel-
lent inventions,' which Peter Gnapheus, the heretical Patriarch
of Antioch, is reported to have introduced into the Catholic
Church is this : ei/ irdcnri ev^r} TJ]V OCOTOKOV KaTovo/xa£e<r$ai /cat
Tcurrr/s TT)V Otiav K\f)(TLV eTrLKaXela-Ocu*, and although the sole
authority for this statement, so far as I am aware, is very late
(cir. A.D. 1320), yet there can be no doubt that it is made by
JSTicephorus on the authority of earlier ritualists, and is con-
firmed by all we know, from other sources, of the adulteration
of the Greek Office Books. Eor this we cannot have a more
competent witness than Leo Allatius, who, in his work on the
Church Books of the Greeks, complains in no measured terms
of the perpetual accretion of their offices, and describes the
process whereby ' maximam librorum copiam majorem fecit, et,
novis semper additis, inolem in immensum auxit.' He men-
tions many authors of these additions, of all ages, and adds, in
words with which we must heartily sympathize : ' Sed utinam
liceret nobis ex primis illis fontibus tamquam integrioribus et
purioribus, divino Christi servitio incumbere ; nae illis super-
seminata ab homine nequam zizania dignosceremus.'
"Thus much about the Church Books of the Greeks in
general. Then, as to the Liturgies in particular, there is a
general conviction among all who have examined them and had
the opportunity of collecting copies, that they have been very
much tampered with by way of interpolation.
" Let me here say, by the way, that the passage which we
8 Nicephorus Callistus, Hist. Eccles. Lib. xv. 28, ad fin.
Vol. ii. p. 634.
interpolation in Greek Liturgies. 427
looked at together in the Bodleian 3, and which is cited by Dr.
Newman (in Note D. to his Letter, No. 13, p. 150) as oc-
curring ' at the Offertory of the Mass,' according to the * Rite
of S. Chrysostom,' in which the Sacrifice of the Altar is offered
through the intercession of the Theotocos, is in fact no part of
the Liturgy of S. Chrysostom, though so reckoned apparently
by Goar. In the Greek Liturgies, that introductory portion in
which that passage occurs is not even ascribed to S. Chrysos-
tom, whose Liturgy proper begins with the tvxrj T^S 7iy>o#eo-ecos,
which follows without a break on the introduction, in Goar
p. 68. But with regard to the Liturgy proper, Goar declares
that the variations, not only in the editions, but in the ancient
MSS. which he had consulted, were so great that he was de-
terred from the task of collation (p. 108).
" "While, then, the present state of the Greek Liturgies and
other Offices must be admitted to be good as a proof of the
actual practice of the Orthodox Church, which I presume is all
that Dr. Newman intended, it would require a far more exten-
sive acquaintance with the history of these accretions than even
Goar or Leo Allatius possessed, to ascertain how far they are
available as a proof of the antiquity of the forms which they
contain."
3 In Pabricii Bib. Graec. torn. v. p. 8, Hamburg, 1712.
APPENDIX.
WHEN I formed the Catena in my "Letter" by aid
of Card, de Turrecremata's work, I had only access
to it through De Alva's work against it. De Alva
gives the authorities quoted by Card, de Turrecre-
mata in what is now Part 6 of his work, accurately
and precisely, and sometimes enlarges them by aid of
MSS. in which he saw them. Some twenty-three of
those authorities I omitted, since, however strong
was my impression of the accuracy of the Cardinal's
citations, there seemed, by De Alva's account, to be
a certain residue, which might, during the 110 years
between his compilation of his authorities and
their publication, have come from some other
hand. The careful study of the Cardinal's work
has so satisfied me that it is one very accurate
whole, that 1 have subjoined some few authors
whom I omitted in the Catena, and have added an
analysis of the whole. I regret that it is but a
skeleton, and can give no idea of the extreme
carefulness and ready learning with which it is
written, or of the way in which every statement is
Labour and care of Card, de Turrecremata. 429
supported by authority. As a specimen of his
painstaking, I may mention how he tells simply
that he had read through the acts and decrees
of the Council of Ephesus for an alleged quotation
of two lines from a tract of S. Cyril against Nes-
torius, which he could not find,1. In another place
he speaks of having read through homilies of
S. Bernard, to.find an alleged passage, in vain. Else-
where he mentions having sent (I think, to Spain) to
verify an authority by the original, which he expected
before the end of the Council. He says he could not
give the precise words of ^Egidius of Zamora, "2 on
account of the distance of Zamora, where his books
are kept, from Basle, where he was writing," but says
that the meaning is certain. But, since the subject
will probably occupy the attention of the approach-
ing Council, I have been anxious, in what degree I
could in the time, to bring before the Bishops the
thoughts of one of their most careful writers.
The following passages of S. Augustine, which
Card, de Turrecremata alleges, ought to have been
quoted before : —
" 8 God judged ifc better, both to take from that very race
which had been conquered, the Man through Whom He should
conquer the enemy of the human race, and yet from a virgin,
Whose Conception Spirit, not flesh, preceded; faith, not passion.
Nor was there present any concupiscence of flesh, whereby
the rest are sown and conceived, who derive [trahunt] original
sin ; but this being most utterly removed, the holy virginity
1 P. 12, c. 11, f. 156. 2 P. 6, c. 32, f. 123.
8 De Trin. xiii. c. 18, n. 23.
430 Supplemental passages of S. Aug.,
was fecundated by believing, not by concumbency ; that what
was born of the stock of the first man might derive its origin
of the race only, not also of criminality. There was born,
then, not a nature vitiated by the contagion of transgression,
but the sole medicine of all such faultinesses. A Man was
born, I say, having no sin, never in the least to have it, through
"Whom should be re-born those to be freed from sin who could
not be born without sin. For, although conjugal chastity
employeth well carnal concupiscence, which is in membris
genitalibus, habet taraen motus non voluntaries, whereby it
shows that it either could not have existed at all in Paradise
before sin was, or, if it were, was not such that it could some-
times resist the will. Need was there, then, that that carnal
concupiscence should not be at all there, when was conceived
the Virgin's Son, in "Whom the author of death was to find
nothing worthy of death, and yet to slay Him, himself to be
conquered by the Death of the Author of Life, conqueror of
the first Adam and holding the human race, conquered by
the Second Adam and losing the Christian race, which was
freed from human crime out of the human race, through Him
Who was not in the crime, though He was from the race, so
that that deceiver should be conquered from that race, which
he had conquered by crime."
" 4 He, the Son of Man, was made the same as thou, that we
may be made sons of Grod. He was ' made flesh.' Whence
the flesh ? From Mary. Whence the Virgin Mary ? From
Adam. Then from that first captive ; and the flesh of Christ
was from the mass of the captivity."
" 6 That one sin, which, being so great, was admitted in a
place and condition of so great felicity, so that in one man in
the origin and (so to speak) from the root [originaliter atque
radicaliter] the whole race of man was condemned, is not
loosed or cleansed, except by the One Mediator of God and
men, the Man Christ Jesus, Who Alone could be so born, as
not to have need to be re-born."
* In Ps. Ixx. Serm. 2. n. 10.
5 Ench. n. 14. c. 48. Opp. vi. 214, quoted with other pas-
sages of the Ench. Turr. iii. 5. f. 44 v.
£ Maximus of Turin. 431
These two corresponding statements, "man" born
after the way of nature, " could not be born without
sin," u Christ Alone could be born, so as not to
need to be re-born," have a strength of evidence
of their own, in so careful a writer as S. Augus-
tine.
151. From S. Maximus of Turin, he quotes, —
" 6 Although Mary, herself a daughter of Eve, had borne
Christ, she had not conceived Him of Adam. "When, then,
the enemy of God saw the Son produced through so many
miracles, he revolved with himself, I deem, and said wondering,
' Who is this, Who, without my knowing, has come into the
world ? I know that He is born of a woman, but whence
conceived, I know not. His mother is here ; but His father I
cannot search out.' ' And below, " ' Since the world was, it
never befell me, that any should be born man, and have nothing
of human fault. What is this generation, so new, so mighty ?
Born among sinners and ungodly, derived too from a mortal
mother, He appears to me cleaner than all who are born, and
purer than heaven itself.' >:
A passage was quoted against him from "a
Sermon on the Assumption," then attributed to
S. Maximus ; which also he says his opponent had
(as so frequently besides) alleged imperfectly, but
which does not occur even in the Appendix to the
Benedictine edition of S. Maximus. The two
sermons, so entitled, are (they say) on the An-
nunciation, Serm. xi. xii., App. col. 43, 45, De
Turr. He says (which is plain), that the passage
relates to the Nativity, not to the Cone, of the
6 Horn. 37, de quadr. 1, col. 106, 107.
432 Ancient writer quoted as S. Cyril Al.
B. Y. ; it being a comment on Isa. xi. 1, which
was interpreted of the Nativity, and was read at
the festival of her Nativity, and the word heing
" prodiit." " 7 From a vitiated root there went
forth (prodiit) a rod, which is understood of the
Virgin Mary, as Isaiah testifieth, 'a rod, &c."5
Petavius 8 alleges from a homily of S. Maximus,
an expression which, he thinks, could only have been
used by one who believed that the B. V. was sub-
ject to human infirmity. The Roman editor of
S. Maximus thinks otherwise9.
I cannot verify an authority in which the name
was probably wrongly deciphered, as " S. Cyril in
his tract against the Manichees," who, in the
heading of the chapter, is called by the editor,
Chrysostom (with whom " the chosen vessel " is a
favourite title for S. Paul). Anyhow, it is evi-
7 P. xii. c. 8. f. 253 v.
8 De Inc. xiv. 1. 6.
9 The words are, " Ait Illi beatissima Mater, ' vinum non
habent,' cui, velut indignans, respondit Jesus, ' Quid mihi et
tibi est, raulier ? ' Haec verba indignantis esse, quis dubitat ?
Sed idcirco, ut reor, quia tarn temere ei mater de defectu car-
nalis poculi suggerebat, qui veniret totius orbis gentibus
novum salutis seterna3 calicem propinare." Horn. 23 (De
Epiph. Dom. 7) col. 68, B,oma3. " Temere " must, I suppose,
mean "inconsiderately." To me, the meaning of S. Maximus
seems to turn, not simply on the word "temere" alone, but
much more on the words " tarn temere," with the comment,
"bsec verba indignantis esse quis dubitat?" I doubt whether
any modern writer would use them ; much less one who
believed in the Imm. Cone.
S. Cyril Alex. 433
dently a real authority, whom Turrecremata was
extracting, —
" * The Lord Alone came in the likeness of sinful flesh ; He
Alone was like sinners in the nature of the flesh which He
took, but was not a sinner by -conversation. He Alone ac-
quired a new glory of the flesh (as the chosen vessel stated),
that He should be accounted not a sinner but like a sinner."
And below, "His was the likeness of sinful flesh, Who
knew not the verity of sin." And below, " This being so,
One and Alone is our Lord, "Who both united the flesh with
the spirit for the salvation of the flesh, and bore the likeness
of sinful flesh with uninjured and inviolate holiness of spirit."
From S. Cyril (in answer to the passage alleged
from " a treatise against Nestorius " which he
could not find, " After Christ, it is rash to place in
Mary spot or sin " (which would also, he says, relate
to actual, not original sin), he quotes S. Cyril's
anathema : —
" 2 Whoso says that He, i. e. Christ, offered an oblation for
Himself also, and not rather for us alone, for He needed not
an oblation for Himself, Who altogether knew not sin, let him
be anathema" (Ep. ad Nest. Opp. T. 5. P. 2, p. 77).
I may add two citations from De Bandelis, of
which the first is like S. Cyril : —
" 3 When the Saviour came, there was no just man upon
earth, as the Ap. teaches, saying, ' For there is no difference,
for all have sinned and need the glory of God, i. e. Christ, Who
Alone was without sin ' " (on S. Luke).
and —
" 3 Peace was made on earth through Christ, because taking
1 Turr. P. 3. c. 6. f. 45 v. 2 L. xii. c. 11. f. 256.
3 De Bandelis, p. 39.
E e
434 & Leo I.
away from the midst the enmity which was against us, He
reconciled us all with the Father. And therefore His Name
was well called Jesus, i. e, Saviour, because He was incarnate
for the salvation of the whole human race."
From S. Leo I chiefly adduced his sermons on
the Nativity. Turrecremata chiefly urges the autho-
rity of the Epistle to Flavian, as having been
stamped, moreover, by the authority of the Council
of Chalcedon.
" 4 To the same concurs the most blessed Leo I., in that
his Epistle which he wrote to Flavian on the faith, of whose
authority, in the cap. S. Horn. Eccl. di. 15 [c. 3] where works
of the holy Fathers which are received as Catholic in the Church
are mentioned, it is said, < Also the Epistle of S. Leo, directed to
Bp. Flavian, in the Council of Chalcedon, whose text if any
one dispute to one iota, and receive it not reverently, let him
be anathema.' In this Epistle he thus speaks : ' For if man,
when made in the image and likeness of God, had abode in
the honour of his nature, and had not, through concupiscence,
being deceived by fraud of the devil, departed from the law
imposed upon him, the Creator of the world would not be-
come a creature, nor the Everlasting take what belonged to
time, nor the Son of God, equal to God the Father, assume
the form of a servant, or the likeness of flesh of sin. But
because, " through envy of the devil, death entered into the
world," and the captivity of man could not be loosed, unless He
should so undertake our cause as, without injury to His own
majesty, to become Very Man, and should Alone not have the
contagion of sin,' &c. "
Thus far is (through whatever accident) from
S. Leo's third sermon on Pentecost 5 ; the rest,
which is marked as from the conclusion of the
4 Turr. vi. 1, f. 96 v.
5 Serm. 77, de Pent. 3, c. 2, f. 309, ed. Ball.
S. John Damascene. 435
s
" Sermo," from the Epistle to Flavian, and occurs
also, though not consecutively, in his second sermon
on the Nativity.
" The Son of G-od enters into these lower parts of the world,
coming down from heaven, and not departing from the glory
of the Father, generated by a new order, by a new nativity.
1 By a -new order,' because, invisible in His own [abode] He
was made visible in ours ; He, the Incomprehensible, willed to
be comprehended ; abiding before all time, He took beginning
in time ; the Lord of the universe, shrouding the Infinity of His
majesty, took on Him the form of a servant ; the Impassible
God disdained not to be passible Man, and the Immortal to
be subject to the laws of death. ' Generated by a new
Nativity,' because inviolate Virginity knew not concupiscence,
ministered the substance of the flesh. Then was taken from the
Mother of the Lord, nature, not fault."
On S. John Damascene, T. observes, that P.
Lombard (iii. d. 3) and S, Thomas (in 3 p. q. 27
ad ult.) refer "the cleansing of which he speaks, to
the cleansing of the fomes, which cleansing takes
place in those only who have had or have orig. sin
(as above). Therefore it follows as before " (f. 97).
S. Gerard 6, Bp. of Csanad and Martyr, A.D. 1048.
" ' Although the B. V. was born from the mass of sin, yet
because her own conversation was uniformly most holy, nor
6 S. Bernard (in de Turr.) is doubtless a misprint for " B.
Erhard" (as Prof. Stubbs conjectures). De Band, has "B. He-
rardus Ep. et Mart.," and in the marg. " F. Gerard." He wrote
a book " on the praises of the B. V. M. ; Lenten Sermons ;
Homilies for the great days of the whole year," which were
preserved in the library of the Sagredos at Venice. Mabillon
Acta SS. O. Ben. Sac. vi. T. 1, p. 627. De Turr. quotes from
a serm. on the Nat. of the B. Y.
E e 2 -i-
436 S. Bernard.
doth she remember any offence whatsoever, she was altogether
free from the chain of sin. For Grod cleansed her from all
offence, from the most pure beginning of her nativity.' And
below, * O happy maiden, which weeps in the cradle, and is so
elect in heaven ; which, being conceived from sin, is purified
from all sin, and, conceiving without sin of the Holy Spirit,
bore God the Word most ineffable ' " (f. 100 v.).
From S. Bernard, De T. also quotes, —
" 'Behold, I beseech you, of what sort is this; how new,
how admirable, how lovable, how delightsome ! For what more
beautiful, than a pure generation ? What more glorious,
than a holy and spotless Conception, wherein is nothing of
shame, nothing of defilement, nothing of corruption ? For
that conception is not only glorious in its, as it were, outward
beauty, but also precious in inward power, so that (as is written),
in the left hand of the Lord glory and riches are found together,
riches, I say, of salvation, with glory of newness. For * who
can make clean what is conceived of unclean seed,' save He
Who was Alone conceived without fallen [illicita] and unclean
pleasure ? In my very root and origin I was infected and
defiled. Unclean is my conception ; but there is, by Whom
that confusion should be removed. He takes it away, on
Whom Alone it falleth not. I have riches of salvation, whereby
I may redeem the impurity of my own conception — the most
pure Conception of Christ. Thou hast yet greater riches,
thou hast ampler glory. The Mother is without corruption of
virginity, the Son without all stain of sin. There falleth not
on the Mother the curse of Eve ; there falleth not on the Child
that general condition, whereof it is said by the Prophets,
* None is clean from defilement, not an infant, whose life on
the earth is of one day.' Lo an Infant without defilement,
Alone among men, True, yea too, the Truth itself. ' Behold
the Lamb without spot, Who taketh away the sins of the
world ! ' For who should better take away sins, than He
on Whom sin falleth not ? He can undoubtedly wash me, of
Whom it is certain that He was not defiled. Let this Hand
r In Vigil. Nat. Dom. Serm. 4, n. 2. 3. 5. col. 772, 773.
Peter Comestor. 437
cleanse my mud-blinded eye, "Which Alone was without dust !
Let Him take away the mote of my eye, "Who hath no beam
in His own ; rather, let Him take away the beam out of mine,
Who hath not even a little dust in His own ! "
De Alva objects to the authority from Peter
Comestor % that the style is different, and that a
writer a little later than De Turr. quotes as from
Pet. Comestor the words, " A lily, white without
streak of sin. A beautiful mirror, without original
stain." But if his, it says no more than the passage
itself, that she was cleansed from original sin in the
womb, though " conceived with fault and penalty."
Omitted authorities are, —
152. " 9 Ancient Doctor of Paris following Pet. Lomb. and
8 Cited above (p. 198), as taken from Castellanus, on De
Alva's conjecture. De Turr. quotes it : " The venerable Father,
master of histories, called Peter Comestor, in a sermon on the
Nativity of the B. Y." (P. 6, c. 26, f. 117). Labbe mentions
a report, "A sermon [of his] on the Immaculate Conception
of the B. Y. M., is said to have been printed at Antwerp by
G. AVestermann, A. 1536, extracted from an old MS. in
England." Scr. Eccl. ii. 200. But there is no proof— 1) that
it was printed ; 2) that it was his ; 3) that it did teach the
Imm. Cone., since so many passages are alleged for it, and
which only express belief of her immaculateness at the birth.
The Decastichon, quoted by Vine. Bellov. (Spec. his. 29, 1),
and from him by S. Antoninus (Chron. tit. 13, c. 8, T. 3,
p. 77), relates only to her greatness. De Turr. says the same
(xiii. 2, f. 203 v., 264), and that the passage has no force,
against his saying to the contrary.
9 Turr. vi. 28, f. 117 v. De Alva would have this to be the
work of Arinachanus, and so only a multiplication of autho-
rities ; but Armachanus' Summa begins " Fides est substantia
438 Richard of Armagh.
Hugo ; but no name is expressed in the book which we have,
his Summa, which begins ' Primum principium omnium sive
Deum esse sic ostendknus.' In 3J. iii., answering the ques-
tion, ' Whether the Flesh of Christ, before it was united to the
"Word, was, in the B. V., subject to sin ? ' he answers, ' It
must be said, yes ; but not in as far as it was the Flesh of Christ,
but, before it was united to the Word, it was, by the operation
of the Holy Ghost, cleansed from all contagion.' And below ;
1 The corruption of fault was in the" flesh of the Y ., when the
Angel came to her, according to which she could sin. But in
the coming of the Holy Ghost, the flesh was filled with grace
and purged from that corruption, and thus she was twice
sanctified/ " &c.
153. Richardus Armachanus, i. e. Richard Fitz-
Ralph, A.D. 1347, a disciple of John Baconthorpe,
Divinity Prof, and Chancellor of Oxford.
"10In 3 Sent. di. 3, he says the same, as appears by the
testimony of some, who hold the contrary. Magister John,
who zealously stirred this matter in this sacred Council, ex-
pressly relates this in his sermon on the Conception. But as
to what is said, that he of Armagh retracted this in a sermon,
viz. ' Wisdom built her a house,' until this be shown, by trust-
worthy attestation which should be satisfactory to this sacred
Synod, it is not to be believed, especially since John Vitalis,
who first stated this in his little tract hereon, is known most
certainly to have spoken falsely in many like things, which he
said of other Doctors, as of Alex, de Ales, St. Thomas, and
Alexander Neckham."
Dominicans. — 154. Peter de Palude (de la Palu),
Master of Paris, Dominican Patriarch of Jerusalem,
died A.D. 1342. "He wrote on the whole of Scr.
as well as on the hook of the Sentences V " A great
rerum, non apparentium ;" and he proceeds to assign to human
grounds a province inferior to faith.
10 vi. 28, f. 118. > Quetifi. 607.
Peter de Palude. 439
ornament of his order, nation, age, highly com-
mended by almost all writers 2." He was sent by
John XXII. as Nuncio to Flanders.
After having given at great length the grounds
on both sides, he sums up-3, —
2 Ib. 603.
3 De Alva alleges on the contrary, some sermons published
first anonymously, then under his name. Quetif says, "Although
there are many praiseworthy things in these sermons, there
are intermingled so many and such great puerilities, savouring
of the simplicity and levity of the author, that it is a great
wrong to our De Palude to ascribe them to him, being a man,
not only of erudite and most eloquent discourse, but of clear
and discriminating judgment. In editions subsequent to
that of Nuremberg, 1496, many sermons were cut out, fabulous
and puerile histories were removed, almost all heads of sermons
cut off, yet many things were left, alien from De Palude, and so
they appeared at Paris (F. Eeynault, 1572, 1573. 8), and were
called ' the productions of an anonymous erudite Theologian,
and of no mean judgment' (Quetif i. 607). So they were re-
stored to their anonymousness. Quetif observes (besides that —
1) they were at first published anonymously; and that, 2)
when published under the name of De Palude, no ground was
assigned for ascribing him to them), that, 3) several authors
are quoted in them later than De Palude — Simon de Cassia,
died A. 1348 ; Th.de Argentina, Augustinian, died A. 1357 ;
Peter de Candia, Franciscan, elected Alexander V., A. 1409.
4) That he cites Franciscans rather than Dominicans, and
abandons S. Thomas for Scotus ; and on the question, " whether
Christ would have come, had there not been sin," abandons
the H. Doctor in his Summa, asserts nakedly that he was
deceived, and embraces the opinion of S. Bonaventura, which
was also that of Scotus ; and maintains at length, that Christ
would then have come in impassible flesh — the opposite whereof,
Alva says, De Palude holds in the Sentences. The reference to
the Council of Basle in the first edition, might, Quetif says,
440 Thomasinus.
"4The third on the opposite side is to be granted, and the
three following, which prove that she was conceived in original
sin."
155. Thomasinus of Ferrara, Dominican. " 5 He
wrote a compendium of S. Thomas on the Sen-
tences, using throughout the very words of the
holy Doctor, omitting much, yet giving the chief
things, sometimes in a different order, adding some
little from time to time, especially when new ques-
tions had arisen in his own day, as on the
Conception of the B. V., to clear and defend the
sentiment of the saints. Sometimes also things
are noted in the margin from the Summa, when
the matter is treated there more clearly or cer-
tainly."
" 6 On iii. Sent. di. 3, he speaks in these exact words, agreeing
with Thomas ; ' Before the infusion of the soul, the B. V. could
not be sanctified ; nor was she sanctified at the very instant
of her conception, so that grace should preserve her from
original sin, that she should not be infected by it. For Christ
hath this exclusively in human nature, that He needed not
redemption, because He is our Head, but to all of us belongeth
to be redeemed by Him. This would not have been, had there
been any soul uninfected by original sin. And therefore it can-
not be said that the B. V. was sanctified in the first moment of
her infusion.' "
have been inserted by the Editor. But on these and other
grounds, Alva [I suppose in a later work] concludes that "the
author was a Franciscan, not a Dominican;" and so, of course,
not De Palude ; and of the fifteenth, not the fourteenth century,
very probably after the Council of Basle.
4 L. 3. d. 3. q. 1. f. 23 v.
6 Quetif i. 700.
6 Turr, vi. 29, f. 119 r.
Bernard of Clermont — Rob. de Holcof. 441
156. Bernard de Gannato, of Clermont, Do-
minican, " a very famous master of Paris 7," lived
about the close of Cent. 13 and beginning of the
14th, " was often cited by John Capreolus on the
Sentences 8."
" 9 In his criticisms of Henri of Ghent in the Quodlibet 15,
q. 13, he says, ' It is certain that the B. V. contracted original
sin, both because she proceeded from the corrupt mass, even as
others, and because she herself belonged to the universal re-
demption made by her Son, even as others. ' For all have
sinned and need the glory of God ' (Eom. 3 and Eph. 3). ' We
were by nature children of wrath.' Whence neither was she
excluded. Therefore it is to be held that she contracted orig.
157. Robert de Holcot, a Dominican, Doctor
and Professor of Theology at Oxford, " a man of
acutest genius, most studious of learning, human
and Divine, of much labour, incredible industry,
and of such reading, as to have gone through
almost all the older theologians of note." Died
1349. He wrote largely on Holy Scripture, as
well as on the Sentences.
" ' On the Book of Wisdom, Lect. 161, treating of that of
Wisdom 14, 'men trust their souls to a little wood,' and pur-
suing the thought, how Christ is the wood of life, says, 'As
wood, planted in the earth, consolidates the earth on all sides,
and by its roots binds and holds it together, that it fall not off;
so Christ, planted in the V. M. His mother, consolidated her
by virtues, and so bound her by graces that she could never
7 Turr. 8 Quetif i. 402.
9 Turr. vi. 29, f. 119 v. 120. » Turr. vi. 29, f. 120.
442 Rob. de Holcot.
fall off through sin, mortal or venial. For she was so sanctified
in the womb, that she was cleansed from original sin, and the
fomes was so bound in her, that it never inclined her to sin.
And this was the first sanctification in her mother's womb2.
But the second was in the Conception of her Son, in which the
fomes was taken away, according to its essence, and grace was
superadded, and determined the free-will inflexibly to good,
so that from that time she could in no way be bent to evil,
whence she was then established in such way as she could
be on the way " [i. e. not having yet attained].
158. Thomas de Walleis, English Dominican,
Master in Theology, imprisoned A.D. 1332 by John
XXII. for charging him with heresy for denying
2 " In the printed editions (as Basle, 1586, Lect. 58, p. 532),
sixteen lines are inserted, directly contradicting the preceding
statement, affirming that she was not conceived in original sin.
But Deza says that they were uniformly absent from MSS., of
which he had seen * six very old.' Even De Alva owns that
'they were absent from all MSS. except two ;' but he does not
add," Quetif says, " whether they were on the margin or in the
body of the MSS., whether in the same hand, or whether
before or after the Council of Basle. Certainly they are not
in old MSS. of the fifteenth century. So, on the ground of
the decree of that Council, the editors of the first edition at
Spires, A.D. 1483, falsely ascribed those lines to the author,
which, whether it was rightly done, be the Sovereign Pontiff
the judge. The Eoman Index, however, had not allowed this in
authors anterior to the Bull of Sixtus IV., commanding that
they should remain intact" (Quetif i. 630). The interpo-
lation is not in any of the Oxford MSS., viz. Bodl. 279 [14th
cent.] ; Merton, 161 [14th cent.] ; Ball. 27 [end of 14th cent.] ;
Merton, 162 [beg. of 15th] ; Lincoln, 110 [15th cent.] ; Magd.
148 [15th cent.]. The Bodl., Mert. 161, Magd. 148, are, how-
ever, probably not independent of each other, since, owing
probably to the 6/Aoiore'A.evrov, they all omit the words be-
tween the "fomes," 1. 3 of the text above, and the "fomes"
I. 6. All the MSS. omit " mortal or venial," 1. 1.
Thomas de Walleis. 443
that the souls of the faithful see God before the
Eesurrection ; released at the prayer of the king of
France and University of Paris. He "wrote a
good Postill on the Psalms of the two first noc-
turns 3 " (i. e. Psalms 1—37).
" * In his postill, treating on Ps. 17, ' My God, His way is
perfect,' says, 'The w#y, whereby God came to us, was the
Bl. V. She was an undefiled way, because she was clean in
the Conception of her Son. For the Sun of Righteousness,
coming into the Virgin, took away wholly all fomes of sin.
Therefore, saith S. Jerome in the Sermon on the Assumption,
' All which was wrought in her was purity and simplicity, all
was truth and grace, all was righteousness and mercy which
looked down from heaven.' ' "
He is often confused with Thomas Jorsius or
Joyce (died A.D. 1310), who wrote on "the Psalms
of the first nocturn " i. e. Psalms 1 — 25, each being
commonly called Thomas Anglicus. De Alva
quotes from Th. Walleis. He gives this fuller
extract, which perhaps may be an expansion of the
comment of the first writer in the second : —
"In the Conception, because it is said (Ps. 77), 'Thy
way is on the sea,' * mari,' i. e. Mary, and in her conversation.
Ambrose says somewhere, ' The ship passeth in the sea, and
there are no traces in the wave.' Christ cometh from heaven,
and is conceived through the ear, and the Word is formed in
the womb. Such Mary remained. She was also an undefiled
way in her whole conversation. The cause was, that she ever
had the Sun of Righteousness, going on and drying up, in her
sight. Moreover, she long-time had Him bodily within her,
Laur. Pignon, n. 107. 4 vi. 29. f. 120.
444 Nicolas Gorram.
and therefore no spot of mud could be in her ; yea, if it had
been, it had been consumed in the instant, because, were the
sun infinite, it would act in ah instant. But the Sun of
Righteousness is infinite. And therefore, coming into the
Virgin and acting through His light and heat, immediately in
the same instant, He consumed all source of grief in her. For
He extinguished and removed the fomes of sin too bodily.
"Wherefore S. Jerome says, in his book on the Assumption5,
1 Whatever in her,' &c."
159. Nicolas Gorram, "Postillator of the whole
Bible." " In the interpretation of H. Scripture and
preaching of the Word of God he was so eminent
in his times as to be second to none ; a man of
piety, sound learning, eloquence, practical wisdom,
and every gift which can be desired. Died about
A. 1285." Quetifi. 438.
" 6 All which things being considered, a most clear testimony
seemeth to be collected from the aforesaid saying of the Angel,
that the most sacred V. was conceived in original sin; since
the fomes itself is, materially, original sin, as appeared above.
Whence Augustine, in his book of retractations (De Verbis Ap.),
as the Master of the Sentences adduceth (in ii. di. 30) saith : —
' There is ever fighting in the body of this death, because con-
cupiscence itself, wherewith we are born, cannot be ended ;
which concupiscence, wherewith we are born, is a vice which
6 In the Opp. Suppositia, T. xi. p. 100 ed. Vallars, who calls
the book a fraud, as it personates S. Jerome, as if written to
Paula and Eustochiura.
6 P. 5. c. 2. ff. 83 v. 84, referred to in P. 6. c. 29 f. 120,
" Mag. Nic. Gorran on Luke : •' The Holy Ghost shall super-
vene in thee,' &c., which, as was said above, refers to the
extinction of the fomes of sin." De Alva, not looking to the
place referred to by Turr., says that he does not give Gorram's
words.
Vincent. Historial. — James of Benev. 445
maketh the little one capable of concupiscence, but rendereth
the adult concupiscent.' For which words of Aug., the Mag.
Sent, saith, it is given to be understood, what is original sin,
i.e. the vice of concupiscence, which through Adam entered
into all born through concupiscence, and vitiated them (which
also he confirmeth by testimony of Augustine), saying, ' Whence
Aug. in the book De Bapt. Parv., Adam, besides the example
of imitation, did also by a hidden corruption of his carnal con-
cupiscence, corrupt in himself all who should come of his
stock.' "
160. Vincentius Historialis,i.e. Bellovacensis, lec-
tured privately at Paris, A. 1228. Died A.D. 1264.
One of the first Dominicans. For love of study he
declined all dignities. Chaplain to S. Louis
(Quetifi. 212, q. 97).
" 7 Tn a glorious tract which he compiled in praise of the
Virgin, worked together from authorities of the Saints, in the
chapter on the sanctification of the B. V., in proof that she was
sanctified in the womb from original sin, among other things,
he adduces that of Bernard on the Assumption of the same most
sacred Ever- Virgin, which is a manifest proof of the proposi-
tion, ' it is altogether clear that the B. V. was cleansed by grace
alone from the original contagion' " (See ab. p. 176).
161. James of Beneventum, Dominican, about
A. 1360, wrote commentaries on S. Luke and
S. John, treatises and sermons 8.
" 9 In his notable and copious work of sermons on the
seasons and the Saints, in his sermon on the Nativity of the
7 De Turr., f. 120 v. In P. 13, c. 2, f. 263 he answers the
allegation on the other side, saying, 1) that in his L. 8, c. 121,
he alleges nothing of his own, and 2) that Ildephonso (i. e.
Paschasius Radbertus), whom he quotes, is 'speaking only of
the Nativity.
8 Quetifi. 648. ' Turr. 1. c.
446 John of Luxemburg — J. Sterngasse.
B. V., on the text ' Yas admirabile opus Excelsi,' in proof of her
sanctification from original sin, he adduces Prov. 25. * Take
away the rust from the gold, and a most pure vessel shall come
forth.' "
162. John Pickardi, of Luxemburg, Domi-
nican, Bachelor of Paris about 1708, " l most illus-
trious for religion, doctrine, and practical wisdom."
" 2 In his sermon on the Nativ. of the B. V. on the text, * A
little fountain which grew into a river' (Esther x.), he says, 'This
river was little, because it was conceived in original sin ; but at
grew in its sanctification in the womb, and its increase was in a
fourfold way. First was the sanctification in the womb, which
was greater than the sanctification of Jeremiah and John
Baptist.' "
163. John Steringacius, Teutonicus (de Sperne-
gasse Laur. Pignon n. 39, de Sterngasse Leander,
f. 136 v.), Doctor of Paris about 1390, wrote on
the Sentences, Questions on Nat. Phil., Sermons
on the seasons and on Saints s.
" 4 On the Sent. 3. d. 3, he says thus, ' The B. V. was not
sanctified, either before the conception, nor in the conception
before the infusion of the soul, because the rational soul is the
proper subject of sanctifying grace ; nor again in the instant of
the infusion of the soul, because so she would not have con-
tracted original sin, as neither did Christ, and so it would not
belong to all to be redeemed by Christ; but she is believed
only to have been sanctified after the infusion of the soul.'-"
1 Quetif i. 522. 2 Turr. 1. c. 3 Quetif i. 700.
4 Turr. 1. c. De Alva assumes the passage to belong to the
Compendium of Hannibaldus (ab. p. 229), on account of the
identity of the words ; but it is a common formula, and " Bun-
derius had seen the book." Quetif.
Rob. Conton — Barth. de Pisis. 447
Franciscans.— 164. Eobert Conton or Cothon,
English Franciscan, Oxford and Paris, Doctor of
the Sorbonne, ua man of acuteness and solid judg-
ment5." About 1340. "He was called Doctor
Amoenus."
"6 In his L. 3. q. 9, inquiring whether the B. V. contracted
original sin, having recited the opinion of those who hold the
negative with some of their arguments, he uses these words,
' But although this opinion is probable, yet, since the contrary-
opinion seems to be of the mind of the saints, therefore I hold
it. And I say that the arguments alleged conclude as to the
B. V. more than as to any other. And I grant that, if any one
was preserved, it is more in harmony as to the mother of
Christ than as to others.' "
165. Bartholomseus de Pisis, Franciscan. The
only Bartholomew of Pisa mentioned by Wading
is Barth. Albicius, A.D. 1872, who wrote " Conformi-
tates B. Marise V. cum D.N. Jesu C.," or usix books
on the life and praises of the B. V." De Alva says
that he could not find the passage in the Quadra-
gesimale of Barth. Albicius, printed at Milan 1498,
and adduces a passage from Serm. 37, where B. Alb.
speaks of " the infusion of grace bestowed by God
in the conjunction of the soul with the flesh," and
from his Mariale (Ven. 1590) tract. 7, in which he
speaks of the preservation of her conception from
original sin as a "pious belief." We have had
5 Pitseus (de 111. Aug. Scriptt. p. 443), who says that he was
wont eagerly to maintain the Imin. Cone. Bale says, " They
are wont to adduce him as a witness, that Mary contracted a
stain (macula) in her conception." Cent. 5, n. 65, p. 424.
6 Turr. vi. 32, f. 123.
448 Barth. de Pisis — Jac. de Casali.
*
instances of the omission of passages adverse to
that belief, and also we have had instances of
the insertion of passages favouring it. One hun-
dred and twenty-six years had intervened before
the publication of the Quadragesimale, 218 before
the appearance of the Mariale. If the passages in
Barth. Albicius are his, the " Barth. de Pisis " of
Card, de Turr. must be another Franciscan.
" 7 In his Lent sermons, on the Gospel, ' There was a dedica-
tion-feast in Jerusalem' (John x.), inquiring whether, de facto,
when any one is sanctified, he is made impeccable, he lays down
a fourfold difference of sanctification. He says thus : ' In the
fourth way, a person is sanctified by a sanctification, whereby a
faculty is given of avoiding both venial and mortal sin, by
removal of the fomes or overcoming (superationem). And in
that way the glorious mother of Christ was sanctified in the
second sanctification, which was in the Incarnation of the Son
of God,' adducing Alex, de Ales, in 3."
166. U8To the same effect is the fath. br.
Jacobus de Casali, of the same order, in a treatise
which he wrote on that matter.'7
Augustinians. — 162. Bernard Oliveri, Mag. of
Paris, Provincial of the Augustinians A.D. 1330,
Bishop of Tortosa, " the most eminent man of his
age in Spain, and most eminent theologian of his
time." Th. de Herrera in Ossinger, Biblioth. Aug.,
p. 642.
7 Turr. vi. 32, f. 123.
8 Turr. vi. 32, f. 123 v. He wrote "Learned Questions
on Philosophy and Theology," Wading (Script. Ord. Miu.
p. 798), who also mentions him alone as the eminent writer in
the monastery of Casalis in the custodia of Montferrat (Ann.
Min. ix. p. 195).
John Teuton. — Henry de Vrimaria. 449
0
" 9 In Lis sixth Quodlibet, q. pen., winch he framed on the
Conception of the B.Y., he is of the same sentiment as ^Egidius
Eomanus."
168. "John Teutonicus, Augustinian !, both in
his postills on ' Missus est ' and his sermons on
the Conception of the B.V."
" 2 In his Serm. 2 (beg. ' Lauda ac Isetare, filia Sion ') he says,
' It is to be held that the B. V. was conceived in original sin,
because in her Cone, virtus virilis seminis et amplexus maritalis
intervened ; and under that original fault she was for some
(aliquod) time, although it is credible that that time was very
short, and, as it were, imperceptible. Nor does it derogate
from the praise of the B. V. that she was conceived in original
sin."
169. Henry de Vrimaria, or Frimaria 3, Au-
gustinian Doctor of Theology at Paris about A.D.
1334, well-studied in H. Scr. and the Aristotelic
Philosophy ; distinguished for personal piety and
charity (Pamph. Chron. Ord. Erem. p. 40,
Possevini Appar. T. 1, p. 733).
" * In his work de Sanctis, in his sermon on the Nativity, he
is altogether of the same opinion [as Jordanes Teutonicus].
9 Turr. vi. 33, f. 114. De Alva admits the passage, but says
that he did not write Quodlibets, but only revised, amended,
and perfected those of his master, ^Egidius Eomanus (n. 46).
1 Among the Dominicans, three persons were known as
Joannes Teutonicus. I do not find any in Ossinger.
2 Turr. 1. c.
3 Ossinger says (p. 953) that P. de Alva published a treatise
of his for the Conception of the B. V. with nineteen others
(Lov. 1664). No such work is mentioned in Pamphilus, who
enumerates twenty works of his, or by Ellsius. Probably it is
the very sermon which De Alva thinks to make for him.
4 T. vi. 33, f. 124.
F f
450 De Vrimaria.
De Alva gives some words of his, as if they
made for him.
" Her singular dedication was this ; her internal sanctification
was swifter and more copious than others. It is clear as to
swiftness, because the sanctification of John was in the 6th
month, that of Jeremiah still later, but the El. V., as it were, in
imperceptible time, so that some say, that in the same instant
in which she contracted original sin, she was sanctified by
grace. Shall we not say more holily, rightly, and better, that,
being prevented through the grace of sanctification, she was
preserved from original sin ? Certainly it is more reasonablv
and honestly said, than that in the same instant she was both
stained and purged and sanctified."
But this seems only to say, that it would be
better to say at once that the B. V. was preserved
from original sin, than to assert a self-contradictory
proposition in order to seem to maintain the
universal transmission of orig. sin, and yet abso-
lutely to exempt her from it.
In the 4th sermon De Vrimaria said, —
" I say, first, that the B. V. is called a tender rod through
the purity of innocence ; for she was sanctified by grace in her
mother's womb, and then through the exercise of virtues," &c.
De Alva said that " both parties owned the sanc-
tification in her mother's womb ;" but, in fact, both
the comparison to the sanctification of John B. and
Jeremiah, and, I think also, the term " sanctified in
her mother's womb " belong to writers who did not
believe her to have been " preserved from orig. sin."
For to be " sanctified " is a gift to one who already
exists ; but the preservation from orig. sin was held
De Vrimaria. 451
to be by grace infused simultaneously with the gift
of existence.
De Alva raises a doubt as to two sermons on the
Conception in the same collection, in the first of
which De Vrimaria speaks (according to De A.)
of the opinion of the Conception in orig. sin as the
more probable, in the second directly asserts it ;
but he questions them only as contradicting the
first sermon on the Nativity, as he understood it.
In the second of these sermons De Vrimaria
speaks of the " three conceptions — of the seed, of
the soul, and of grace, whereof the first -is not to
be celebrated, because, being inanimate, it is not
susceptible of grace, nor the second, on account of
the soul being infected by contact/ with the body."
He says that "the opinion of certain doctors, that the
B. V. contracted not original sin, is repugnant to
H. Scripture, and takes away the greater reverence
for Christ Himself." Then he argues, as in the first
sermon of the Nat., that " she could not have been
purified in the same instant, because two opposites
do not take place in the same instant," and sums
up, " And therefore others .say more probably,
that not in the same instant, in which she was
infected by original sin, but in another proximate
instant, in such wise as was possible to nature, she
was purged and sanctified by grace."
171. John Clivoth, of Saxony [in Turr.'s
printed work it stands ' Liniros Y through mis-
5 Turr. vi. 33, f. 124. In vi. 28, f. 218 v., by a misreading
F f 2
452 Stringarius.
reading, doubtless, of his MS. ; Clivoth is in De
B.], "lived in the 13th cent, a very celebrated
writer and most eloquent preacher" (Oss. p. 235).
" On iii. d. 3, he adduces many authorities of the saints, the
first of which is Aug. on Ps. 34, where Aug. says that the
B. Y. M. died on account of the sin of Adam, adding that it
cannot be explained of death from Adam, which is the penalty,
for that death was common with Christ. Aug. infers the
same, c. Julian, ii., de Nupt. et Cone., and many others."
172. John Stringarius, S. T. P., Augustinian,
chosen A.D. 1434, with fourteen other Theologians
of the Eremites, to be present at the Council of
Florence, where he disputed earnestly against the
Greeks and Arminians6. He must then, unless
there was some other Augustinian of that name,
have been a (perhaps older) contemporary of De
Turrecremata.
" 7 To the same is f. Magr. John Steringarius 8 on 3 Sent.,
John Beleth is printed as " Mag. Joannes Valleti in his Summa
on Divine Offices." He quotes Beleth's words, " That festival
is not authentic." De Alva, identifying the Augustinian with
the Dominican (p. 446), would claim both to be Hannibaldus
under another name. But, although the first part, which is
almost the same formula, occurs in all, the sequel (aa to the
1 fomes ') is not identical with Hannibaldus, as De Alva says,
although it is on the same subject.
6 Oss. p. 879.
7 P. vi. c. 43. f. 124.
8 I have adopted the orthography of De B. for Steringacius
in Turr., supposing it to be one of the orthographical mistakes
in the MS., of which Duimius complains. De Alva would have
it, that it is the same authority as the Dominican Steringarius,
Cistercians. 453
saying that the B. V., neither before Cone, nor in Cone,
before the infusion of the soul, was sanctified, because the soul
is the proper subject of sanctifying grace. Nor again in the
instant of the infusion of the soul, because thus she would not
have contracted original sin, as neither did Christ. But she is
only believed to have been sanctified after the infusion of the
soul. For this was given to other saints also, as to Jeremiah,
who foresignified Christ, and John Baptist, who pointed out
Christ. Therefore it was specially meet that this should be
conferred on the mother of Wisdom, to Which nothing defiled
can enter."
Also, a little below, —
" Nor can it be said, that the fomes was totally taken away
from the B. V. by the grace of sanctification, as was granted to
Adam thro' original righteousness before he sinned, viz. that
the lower powers should never be moved without the will of
reason. For this derogates from the dignity of Christ, that,
before His Incarnation, in Whom the immunity from condem-
nation was first to appear, any one should, according to the
flesh, be freed from the first condemnation. And therefore it
seems that it ought to be said, that by sanctification in the
womb the fomes was not taken away from the Virgin according
to the flesh, but remained bound. But afterwards, at the very
Conception of the Flesh of Christ, it is to be believed that the
total withdrawal of the fomes redounded from the Child to
the mother."
Cistercians. — 173. John Calcar, Cistercian (per-
haps a corrupted name). De B. has a Joh. de
Cervo, Cistercian, who wrote on that side in 3 Sent,
dist. 3.
" 9In a book, which he called ' Collection of Ears of Corn/
which begins, ' The Angel said to the shepherds,' in Serin. 73
but De B. is far too accurate to place the same person
among Dominicans and Augustinians within seven pages.
9 Turr. vi. 35. f. 125.
454 Sermones Soccii.
on the Nativity of our Lady, on the text * The morning arose,'
Gen. 32, he said, ' Where is a distinction of a treble grade of
sanctification. The first is, when it takes place not immediately
in the Conception, but immediately after the infusion of the
rational soul ; and this degree befits the B. V. For it was not
fitting that she should remain long under the original stain,
that the Conception of Christ should be from a most pure
mother."
174. "l John Monachus, Cistercian, in his iii.
d. 3."
C. 175. "Sermones Soccii," sermons for the
whole year, by a Cistercian Prof, of Theology, of
the Convent of Marienrayd, who in humility did
not publish them. They were found in his " socci,"
after his decease, and published under this title,
as a memorial of his humility. " Able, mighty in
Scripture, most fluent writer of sermons " (C. de
Visch, Scriptt. Cist. p. 239).
" 2 In his notable work on the Saints, in the Semi, on the
Nativity of the B. V., on the text, ' I have prepared a lantern
for Mine Anointed,' he says thus : ' But that she might obtain
the highest purity, she was purified thrice ; first in the mother's
womb from original sin, which purification so far restrained
the fomes, that she was able not to sin, yet it left in her the
fomes in its essence.' And he is of the same opinion in other
sermons on the same festival."
De Alva (Ver. 287) allows this passage, but
thinks he may have meant the " depuratio material
1 Ib. " Joannes Monachus, Cistercian, Paris Theologian, wrote
on the Sentences, according to Sylvester Maurolycus, Maris
Oceani, L. ii." De Visch, p. 171.
2 vi. 35, f. 125,
Mag. Garric. 455
ante animationem." He quotes from Andreas
de Peruzzinis, a saying from the 30th sermon:
" There is a treble vse from which she was libe-
rated,— the vse of original sin, the vse of venial
sin, the vse of mortal sin." But since, according
to Turr., he taught the same in several sermons,
this may naturally mean, that she was " liberated "
from it, after its contraction, in her mother's
womb.
176. "Mag. Garric, whether secular or regular
I cannot know." " 3 A profound Theologian, a
Master of Paris."
"* In his Postill to the Romans, treating of E-om. 7: —
* So the law aad commandment are holy,' on occasion of what
Gregory says in his Sermon on the Assumption of the B.V.M.5,
' Nor could she be bowed down by the bands of death,' says,
' It is asked, as to the B.V., since she had original sin, "Why
could she not be bowed down by the bands of death ? and
having distinguished a threefold band, the first whereof is the
leaving the body, the second, the return of the body to ashes,
the third, the descent into hell, he pursues the solution of the
question. But what he says on Eccl. 7, 1 have alleged above "
(see p. 278).
3 Id. v. 1, f. 84 [82] v. * Id. vi. 35, f. 125.
6 There is no such sermon in his works.
ANALYSIS
OF CARDINAL DE TURRECREMATA'S "TREATISE ON THE TRUTH
OF THE CONCEPTION OF THE MOST BLESSED YlRGIN, AS
A RELATION TO BE MADE BEFORE THE FATHERS OF THE
COUNCIL OF BASLE, JULY, A.D. 1437, COMPILED AT THE
MANDATE OF THE LEGATES OF THE APOSTOLIC SEE PRE-
SIDING OVER THE SAID COUNCIL V
PAET I.
C. 1. CARD. DE TURRECREMATA first lays down certain funda-
mental rules to be observed in the judgment on that question.
These rules are: — 1) That in the definitive judgment of a
General Council, testimonies and sayings of Holy Scripture
are chiefly to be weighed and considered ; 2) That, next to the
authority of Holy Scripture, in the definitive judgment of
this present cause, as of any other cause of faith, those holy
Doctors are most to be considered and embraced by the Council,
whose sayings in "matters of faith have been most approved by
the Universal Church. 3) That the testimonies of the Fathers
to be adduced should be viewed in their originals (so as to be
considered in their context). 4) That if any doubt should
arise as to the meaning of any text of Holy Scripture, the
1 The division made by Card, de Turrecremata has been followed, as
marked in the beginning of the volume, because without it his references to
his earlier chapters in the later parts would be unintelligible. The division
into thirteen Parts, marked at the commencement of each Part, was made
by the Editor, Alb. Duimius. The subordinate chapters, into which Duimius
divided each of those Parts, have not been noted, since the double notation
would be confusing, and the folios sufficiently indicate the place in the work.
Analysis of Card, de Turrecr emails work. 457
aforesaid Fathers should be chiefly regarded in the exposition
thereof. 5) That those scholastic Doctors are to be preferred,
both in the exposition and understanding of Holy Scripture, and
in defining matter of faith, who most expressly and formally
resolve their meanings to Holy Scripture and the doctrine of
"the Fathers. These rules he supports largely by authority.
The opponents urged — Obj. 1) Two maxims from a treatise
alleged as S. Aug.'s 2, but wrongly. " Great things are to be
handled the more cautiously if they cannot be corroborated by
special authorities ;" and " When Scripture tells us nothing, we
must seek byreason, what is most agreeable to truth." Inference.
Since there is no express authority as to the Cone., we must go
by reason. Ans. 1) " special " not in S. Aug 3. But what is said
of all, is said of each; so S. Aug. ag. Pelag. Reason may
clear faith, cannot prove it. If no proof of Scr., then, like the
Assumption, it must be matter of opinion. Ans. 2) There are
many testimonies to Cone, in orig. sin. Obj. 2) 1 Pet. 3, "Be
ready to give a reason of the faith." Eom. 12, "Prophesy
according to the ratio fidei." Ans. Not, as these say, full
reason and knowledge, but proof from testimony of Scr. or
from principles of faith. " Perilous to make human reason the
rule and measure of understanding Scr. in determining verities
of faith" (ff. 2.— 8).
C. 2. Exposition of terms of the question proposed by
Council, " Whether it is more pious to believe that the soul of
the most Bl. Mother of God was, at the instant of its infusion
in the body, preserved from -orig. sin, than to believe that the
Virgin herself was conceived in orig. sin," viz. " pious," " con-
ception," " orig. sin." «) " Pious " may mean — 1) belonging to
Divine cultus ; or, 2) most reverential to the B. V. as a mother ;
or, 3) most according to Catholic faith ; or, 4) piously to be
believed, b) " Conception " = animation or nativity in womb, as
opposed to nativity from womb, viz. birth, c) "Orig. sin,"
" wanting of orig. righteousness, which ought to be in us, con-
tracted through vicious origin." So all chief doctors of schools,
2 It is the De Assumptione B. M. V. which, the Benedictines say, is
u auctoris incerti et pii," but which is not of any assignable date. Opp. S.
Aug. T. vi. App. p. 250.
3 It is in the treatise, as the Benedictines have printed it.
458 Analysis of Card, de Turrecremata? s
Alex, de Ales, &c. Opposite definition, " a damnable fault or
offence against God." Ans. This fits better actual sin. If it
implies that one offends God, false ; for no free-will in orig. sin.
Orig. sin, not mortal sin, as contended on the other side. Divine
imputation concurs not as formal cause of orig. sin. Trans-
mission of orig. sin, bee. all in Adam (ff. 8 v. — 11 v.).
C. 3. Opp. holds, that " sentence of Divine law concurs,
hemming in [coarctans] to contraction of orig. sin." Ans.
Law of God cannot be to sin. S. Paul contrasts law of God
and law of sin. Scr. alleged proves law of punishment, not of
fault. Gen. 2, " Thou shalt die;" "Thou shalt return to the
dust." Bom. 8, " Our body is dead bee. of sin," Col. 2,
"the handwriting against us." Even the "foines" is not
from Divine law (ff. 11 v. — 14).
C. 4. Corol. " Original sin, although a great evil, is, in those
conceived in it, as to fault, the least sin, because it has least of
will, i. e. not in the person, but in the principle of the nature."
It may not be said of one in orig. sin, " This soul sins," or
" deserves death." Cor., that the opprobrium that one con-
ceived in orig. sin is foul, stained, tenebrous, &c., said in
declamatory terms, as an appeal to feelings against opinion
that B. Y. was conceived in orig. sin, unfounded (ff. 14 v. — 15).
PAET II.
Second part of the work, in which are put the authorities of the
Old and New Testament according to the glosses and expo-
sitions of the Saints, denying that Christ Alone was free
from original sin in Sis Conception; and refutations of the
general ways of answering on the opposite side, solving also
many of their arguments.
C. 5. Authorities from O. T., with their glosses and decla-
rations, that Christ Alone was conceived without orig. sin (the
force is in the gloss oftener than in the text), a. Gloss on
Num. 19, on " red heifer." b. Job 14, " Who can make that
clean," &c. ; c. "Wisd. 1, " Christ brighter than the sun," &c.
d. Ps. 21, " Thou hast prevented him with blessings of good-
ness." e. f. Ps. 22 and 35, " Deliver my only one," &c.
work on the Conception of the B. F. 459
g. Ps. 22, " On Thee have I been cast from the womb." L Ps. 45,
"Fairer than the sons of men." i. Ps. 51, gloss on "Against
Thee only," and on " That thou mayest overcome, when," &c.
Tc. Ps. 88, "Free among the dead." I. Cant. 2, "I am the flower,"
&c. m. Cant. 5, " Elect out of a thousand." n. Isa. 4, " Seven
women," &c. o. Isa. 53, "Who did no sin." p. Ezek. 9, "Called
a Man," &c. (ff. 15, 16).
C. 6. Auth. out of N. T.— Matt. 3, Luke 3, " This is My
beloved Son." Luke 1, " That Holy thing born of thee," and
"Blessed is the fruit of thy womb." John 1, "Behold the
Lamb of God." John 3, '* He who is from heaven is above
all." John 8, "The Son abideth ever." Ib. "Which of you
convinceth Me of sin ?" Heb. 1 and Ps. 45, " God hath
anointed Thee," Ac. (ff. 16, 17).
Refutation of eight ways of answering these authorities.
C. 7. Way 1. — That Christ might be said to be excepted prin-
cipally, another less principally, as Deut. 6, Matt. 4, " Thou
shalt serve God alone," excludes not 1 Tim. 6, " Serve their
masters." Ans. a) To God latria is due, to man service.
I) Argt. might be extended to all (f. 17).
C. 8. Way 2. — That Christ might be said to be exempted of
Himself, the B. V. by grace, as Matt. 10, " None is good, save
God only." Eev. 15, " Thou only art holy." 1 Tim. 2, " To
God Alone," &c. Ans. a) (as bef.), it would apply to all, not
to B. V. only ; I) many authorities say explicitly, that all besides
Christ contracted orig. sin. It could not be said, " Christ
Alone was blessed, and all saints unblessed, because God and
Christ Alone have incommunicable bliss." " Holy," "good," do
belong to God only (ff. 17 v.— 18 v.).
C. 9. Way 3. — The exclusion would not hold against evidence
of reason. Ans. This begs the question. As to instance of eating
the shew-bread, " doctrine does not admit exception ; practice
may, from circumstances" (f. 18 v.).
C. 10. Way 4. — As to facts, judgments of prophets, unless
specially enlightened by God, may rest on probability, not on
truth, as in Elijah's opinion of Israel. Ans. a) Not doctors
only, but H. Ghost, the Teacher and Inspirer of truth, said it.
I) Too many, too great, holy doctors so spoke (f. 19).
460 Analysis of Card, de Turrecrematds
C. 11. Way 5. — That, if the same reason belongs in a degree
to another, that person is not excluded ; as, " No man knoweth
the Father save the Son," but the H. Gh. knoweth Him.
Christ ought to be without sin, because Mediator ; so the B. V.
also, by reason of her marriage-bond with Christ her Spouse,
being first Mediatrix and reconciliatrix. Ans. a) Rule does not
hold, save in unity of Divine Persons. I) Christ is the
Mediator of all, including the B. V. (f. 19 v.).
C. 12. Way G. — That they allege as universally, that Christ
Alone was without actual sin, and was Alone lorn without sin.
Ans. a) Doctors rest that exception of Christ on what belongs
to Him only, viz. that He was conceived, not " ex virili semine,
sed mystico spiramine," and that He came as the Purifier and
Redeemer of the whole human race, and so, not to be cleansed
Himself, b) S. Aug., Anselm, Bern., do except actual sin
as to theB.V. c) "Birth" did not mean mere birth from
the womb, since Jeremiah and John B. known to have been
born without sin. d) Christ Alone born without " fomes "
(f.20).
C. 13. Way 7. — Since Christ could not be conceived under
orig. sin, the exception of Him did not include all others under
it, any more than the saying, " All men, except angels, are
incorruptible." Ans. (as bef.) a) It would prove too much ;
b) Christ was Man (f. 20 v.).
C. 14. Way 8.— That the B. V. was so united with Christ
that when He is excepted, she is excepted. Ans. a) Christ is
so excepted by Fathers as to exclude all else. £) On grounds,
excluding all else. The Proposition, " Christ Alone was free from
orig. sin," resolves itself logically into two — "Christ was in
His Cone, free from orig. sin," " no one else was " (f. 21).
Answers to seventeen reasons corroborating Way 8, as to
the inclusion of the B. V. with Christ.
C. 15. Reason 1. — "As the operation of the B.V., in her
Cone, and Birth of Christ, was exempted from the common
law, so was her person." Ans. a) Actions of a person being
excepted, so is the person as to those actions, yet not as to
past time. B. V. was excepted from time of her sanctif., not
before. I) Argt. would include too many, the objects of mira-
work on the Conception of the B. V. 461
cles, as Sarah, S. Anne, or the workers of miracles, c) Ope-
ration in the Cone, of Christ, not that of B. Y., but of the
Holy Ghost. Season 2.—" Flesh of Christ and of B. Y. was
one." Ans.- a) Orig. sin is in soul, not in flesh. 5) Flesh of
Son of God and of B.Y. not as whole and part, nor identically
the same, though His was formed of her most pure blood,
and at her own Cone, the flesh of the B. Y. had no relation
to the Flesh of Christ, c) The Church is said to be one flesh
with Christ, yet this does not follow. Absence of orig. sin in
Christ is ascribed to causes peculiar to Himself, d) Other like
sayings, " Christ Alone was born of a Yirgin," " Christ Alone
was conceived of the Holy Ghost," " Christ Alone was at His
Conception Blessed," &c., admit not of exception (ff. 22, 23 v.).
C. 16. Reasons 3, 4. — " The B. Y. being Queen and spouse
of Christ, as He was King, His exemptions and prerogatives
were hers." Ans. a) JSTot Queen, &c., at her Cone. 5) Church
also His spouse ; but to affirm exemption of it, would be to
deny Christ's redemption, c) Although B. Y. was spouse of
God most High, and Mother, yet not one primal principle with
Christ of our redemption, but she was herself redeemed by the
redemption made by the one Saviour (ff. 23 v. — 25 v.).
C. 17. Season 5. — "The B.Y. being with Christ one prin-
ciple in spiritual regeneration, she must be included in Christ's
exemption from orig. sin." Ans. Spiritual regeneration is —
a) wrought by One, God, through grace ; b) for the merits of
Christ ; c) B. Y. cannot concur as one principle ; for God
Alone can infuse grace ; Christ Alone can merit. She is one
of the redeemed, d) The Church is the mother of the sons of
God — i) by Sacramental birth through Baptism ; 2) nourishes
by doctrine and example. B. Y. their mother, bee. she a) bare
their Regenerator ; 5) cares greatly for each soul ; c) in a
certain manner she by charity co-operated to faithful being
born in Church. Past spot injures not present purity
(ff..25 v.— 28 v.).
C. 18. Season 6.—" Christ and the Bl. Y. the first principle
of all living, in spiritual being and life ; such first principle
could not have been spiritually dead." Ans. Same expanded.
Also, Christ, not B. Y., Head of the Church, but influences are
from -the Head. Eeply. a) Prov. 8, Ecclus. 24, read on her
462 Analysis of Card, de Turrecrematrfs
feasts, so speak of wisdom. I) Prayers of Church, "vitam
datam per virginem," " vitain pra3stapuram," &c. ADS. a) Prov.
Eccl. literally of Christ; b) mystically of B.V. or Church.
They cannot mean this, since Christ alone principle of grace ;
as God, as its Author ; as Man, ministerially ; apply to B. V.
as bearing Him Who is fountain of life ; fulness of grace dif-
ferent in B. V. and Christ ; in Christ, redounds to others ; the
B. V. is " gratis non datrix sed impetratrix " (ff. 28 v. — 30).
C. 19. Season 7. — " B. V. was mother of Adam and his prin-
ciple in spiritual being, therefore could not have been corrupted
from him." Reason 8. — " She was first Mediatrix, therefore
never Had any thing for which she needed reconciliation or
Reconciler ; and so not orig. sin." Reason 9. — " She was first
mother of grace and mercy, so never child of wrath." Ans. —
1 Tim. 2, " One Mediator between God and men ;" Col. 1,
"Reconciled all things by Him;" Luke 2, B. V. says, "My
spirit rejoiceth in God my Saviour." B. V. mother of grace,
as bearing Author of grace, co-operating by prayers to gain
grace (ff. 30—31).
C. 20. Reason 10. — " All things were re-made through B. V.,
nothing without her ; so she did not need re-making." Arg.
" By ' through ' is meant secondary cause ; as God moves
heaven through angels, enlightens world through sun, so she
concurred with Christ in meritorious operation, whereby man
was restored. Christ Alone is not to be called the Redeemer,
but also B. Y. ; nor did He redeem the world, save through
her." Ans. This cannot stand with integrity of Christian
faith. Gal. 3, " a mediator," &c. 1 Tim. 2, " One Mediator,"
£c. ; S. Peter, Acts 4, "no other name," "no redemption
except by His Blood." Assigns to B. Y. proper office of the
Humanity of Christ. She herself would not have been re-
deemed ; worthy satisfaction can only be made through hypo-
static union. The re-making of the human race was by merit
of Passion and Death of Christ. But B. V. did not concur
with Christ in suffering and dying for mankind, &c. Opposed
Arg. 1. "Since Christ remits sin and saves His own
through Church meritoriously, much more might B. V. be
said to have concurred with Christ to redemption of man."
Ans. " All receive influences of redemption, not working it."
work on the Conception of the B. V. 463
Tit. 3, " not by works of righteousness," &c. Eph. 2, " saved
by faith, not of yourselves." Incarnation, the principle of grace,
could not be merited. John 1, " Grace and truth by J. C."
Good of one mere man cannot be cause of good to whole
nature. Arg. 2. If men " fellow- workers with God " (1 Cor. 3),
much more B. V. could concur, as helper of God, in causality
of redemption of man. Co-operation fourfold, — 1) giving help ;
2) counsel (neither towards God) ; 3) as His instrument (in
some things, not all) ; 4) by disposing to receive the effects of
work of the Agent, as by teaching or by administering sacra-
ments. These do not bear out concurrence in causality.
Arg. 3. " We receive every thing now through Mary, so she
concurred with Christ in causality of grace." Ans. In that
One meritorious Sacrifice, B. V. concurred not as priest offering,
but as one for whom it was offered. Arg. 4. " As Eve con-
curred with Adam in bringing in sin, so Mary with Christ in
restoring our salvation." Ans. Both sexes concur, but not
causally or effectively. To bring in sin lay within natural power
of first parents ; restoration only by operation of Soul of Christ,
united with Divinity. Things were re-made through B. V.,
only in that she bare the He-maker of all. Obj. The words,
" by her and with her," import more of causality and like-
ness of concurrence with Christ in mystery of redemption.
Ans. Hyperbolical language of devout minds not to be taken
rigorously as language of schools. " Through " to be under-
stood, not in regard to the Passion of Christ, but of her Cone,
of the Eedeemer (ff. 31—34).
C. 21. Reasons 11 and 12. " S. Anselm says, ' B. V. mother
of things created, and of restoration of all things,' so she needed
not re-creation." Ans. S. Anselm himself explains this of her
having borne Him, by "Whom all things were saved (f. 34).
C. 22. Reason 13.-— From Eph. 5, "If Christ loved B. Y. as
Himself, He should have preserved her from orig. sin." Ans.
a) The whole Church the spouse of Christ, of whom it could
not be said. 1) B. V. not spouse of Christ at her Cone,
e) Christ did reserve some things to Himself. Reason 14. —
" Flesh of B. V. flesh of Christ, but no one hateth his own
flesh." Ans. Same as before, as to the Church and the time of
Concep. Hatred in God, not as in man, since God is love 5
4 (j4 Analysis of Card, de Turrecrematd s
nor are little ones in orig. sin shut out from love of God, but
only from completest participation of His love, in vision of His
Essence, forfeited in Adam. Reason 15. — " The Church, the
spouse of Christ, was to be without spot and blemish ; much
more B. Y." Ans., as before. Christ did reserve to Himself
what belonged to His office as Redeemer, not to be born of
human seed, whereby orig. sin contracted, and therein did,
ipso facto, reserve the not being born in orig. sin (ff. 34 v. —
36).
C. 23. Reason 16.—" The B. Y. was not subject to Christ
in His Humanity, as the Church was." Ans. This alien from
the faith of the Catholic Church as to the Saviour J. C., God
and Man. Ps. 8, " Thou hast put all things under His Feet ;"
1 Cor. 15, " All things shall be put under His Feet," did " not
except any thing." Obj. Contrary to evidence of reason; so
B. Y. was not included in that "all." For Scr. does not say
specially that she was, but does say, she is at His Eight Hand.
Ans. False, a) That it is against reason that B. Y. was sub-
jected to our Lord and Saviour Christ. For Scr. says,
" nothing is excepted." Z>) Ps. 45, said literally of the Church.
Humanity of Christ, through hypostatic union, closest to
God. The B. Y. subject to Christ's Humanity, as member to
Head. Christ, the Head of the whole Hierarchy. Christ
merited His exaltation through infinite Yirtue of His Passion.
Christ Alone Son by nature ; all else, adopted. Obj. a) " spouse
and mother not under feet of Spouse and Son." Ans. The
Feet of Christ signifying His dominion, subjection of spouse
to husband is of Divine, natural, Apostolic institution. Gen. 3,
1 Pet. 3, Col. 3. Spiritual espousal to our Saviour, God and
Man, different from espousal to man, the wife's companion.
V) Earthly mothers subject to sons, as Pope or Prince, much
more to King of kings (ff. 36—38 v.).
C. 25. Reason 17. — " That she is in a manner set over Christ
Himself" (Ipsi Christo principatur) ; Luke 2, " and was subject
unto them." Ans. 1.) but also to Joseph, who was not only
conceived in orig. sin, but had venial sins ; 2) S. Luke's words
seem to relate to Childhood of Christ ; 3) Christ's subjection
"of piety, not necessity." Her present princedom over Him
contradicts His session at Eight Hand of God, i. e. His pos-
work on the Conception of the B. V. 465
session of all good things of God. " That the B. V. after the
Ascension was not subject to supreme pontiff contrary to faith "
(ff. 38 v.— 39 v.).
PART III.
Wherein are put the authorities of Holy Scripture, according to
the glosses of the holy Fathers, saying that every man semi~
nally propagated from Adam is conceived in original sin,
with many authorities of many Saints, lights of the Church,
asserting the same, of necessity of faith. And the ways of
answering on the opposite side are refuted.
C. 26. Authorities of O. and N. T., with their glosses and
declarations, that all besides Christ incurred orig. sin. In
O. T., Gen. 17, " He hath broken My covenant," with gloss ;
Lev. 17, uncleanness and sin-offering after child was born.
Job 3, " Perish the day in which I was born." Ib. 15, " What
is man, that he should be clean, born of a woman?" Ib. 17,
" I will say to corruption, thou art my father;" Ib. 25, " How
can he be clean, who is born of a woman?" Ps. 32, "Thou
hast forgiven the iniquity of my sin ;" Ps. 51, "In sins," &c. ;
Ps. 53, " There is none that doeth good ;" Prov. 20, " "Who
can say, my heart is clean ?" Ps. 142, " In Thy sight shall
no man living," &c. ; Isa. 53, " All we, like sheep," &c. ; " The
Lord hath laid on Him," &c. ; Isa. 64, " Thou wert angry, and
we sinned," &c. ; Matt. 18, Luke 15, " If a man have a hundred
sheep," «fec.; John 1, "Behold the Lamb of God;" Eom. 3,
" By the works of the law shall no flesh be justified before
Him." " The righteousness of God through faith in J. C., there
is no difference, for all have sinned," &c. ; Eom. 5, " As by
one man," &c. ; 1 Cor. 1. 15, "As in Adam all die," &c.
S. Aug. adds others, in c. Julian L. i. (ff. 40 — 42).
C. 27. Authorities from SS. Hilary, Chrysostom, Jerome,
Ambrose, Augustine, Leo, Cyril, Bemigius, Bede, Anselm,
Gregory Great, Bernard, that all men, besides Christ, were con-
ceived in orig. sin (ff. 42 — 46 v.).
C. 28. Authorities from the saints, and chiefly S. Aug., that
it appertains to the Catholic faith to believe that all seminally
Gg
466 Analysis of Card, de Turrecremattfs
propagated from Adam were conceived in orig. sin. Council of
Milevis, S. Fulg., S. Aug., S. Anselm, S. Leo, S. Thomas
(if. 46 v.— 48 v.).
Refutation of seven modes of answering authorities of Scr.
and doctors, as to universality of orig. sin in conception of all
seminally derived from Adam.
C. 29. Mode 1. — " In ambiguous passages, Scr. admits of
any rational exposition. The word ' all,' then, in authorities
alleging that ' all, seminally coming from Adam, are conceived in
orig. sin,' is not to be understood of a logical but of a political
universality."
Ans. 1. Very perilous to introduce this distinction in pas-
sages where most evident necessity of Scr. or reason requires it
not. It might be argued, that " all things were made by Him,"
or "all things are naked and open to Him," &c., or" He careth
for all things ;" or " No fornicator or unclean person," &c.; or,
"Lend, hoping for nothing again;" or, " Depart, ye cursed,
into everlasting fire," prove not universality of creation by
the Word, or of God's knowledge or Providence, or deadliness
of fornication, or wrongness of usury, or eternity of punish-
ment. So here, where no evidence of reason requires the con-
trary, it is against glory of God to deny universality of re-
demption. E. g. " All men are liars," " are all under sin, " none
that doeth good," imply logical universality of corruption; and
that "righteousness of God cometh unto all," states uni-
versal efficacy. Authorities ; — S. Aug. repeatedly, S. Amb.,
S. Anselm, S. Bernard, say " orig. sin is to be understood of
all without exception." 2) The same ruled by Council of Milevis,
that universality of original sin was always held- by Catholic
Church every where. So S. Aug., quoting most distinguished
Bishops before him. Obj. " The Church says, in Ath. Creed, ' all
shall rise with their bodies,' " but B.V. shall not then rise.
Ans. 1) H. Scr. had mentioned those who rose at death of
Christ ; so not to be understood universally ; but as to orig.
sin it denies exceptions. Grounds why logical universality
to be held ; 1) Whole argument of so many Fathers against
Pelagians would fail, as to orig. sin ; 2) It would throw
doubt on truth of H. Scr. ; 3) Scripture excepts none, save
Christ ; 4) Universal proposition would be turned into parti-
work on the Conception of the B. V. 467
cular ; 5) In fact, B. V. is nowhere expressly excluded, but is
expressly included by holy doctors. "Why are these authorities
to be taken in logical universality, and others not ? 1) Many
give as rule, "An unfigurative universal in H. Scr. is to be
extended to each included in the subject of the propo-
sition, and not to be restrained to some only, unless the non-
restriction be expressly or deducibly contrary to H. Scr."
Instances objected (some childish) answered. 2) Fathers
frequently repeat, that all seminally derived from Adam incur
orig. sin, and Christ Alone excepted. 3) Authority of Apos-
tolic See in Zosimus, " none can be said to be redeemed, not
before captive under sin." 4) Large authorities of most
illumined and devout doctors (ff. 48 v. — 55).
C. 30. Mode 2. — " Universal rule not to be applied to indi-
viduals, exempted by prerogative or dignity, as a) no argument
from human bodies here to that of Christ, or the B. V., or glori-
fied bodies, b) Esther was exempted, c) First principle of a
being never said to be subject to its contrary, as first luminous
body to darkness. But B. V. is first principle in spiritual life
of all men. d) Causative power does not descend from what
is posterior, but contrariwise. B. V. not so much daughter of
Adam, as his mother; then corruptive force could not have
descended to her." Ans. to a : True, if prerogative belongs to
the same time ; but B. V. not Mother of G-od at her conception.
To 5 : Same, Esther was Queen, passage misunderstood ; c un-
true (as ab.) ; and d fallacy. B. V. was lineally descended from
Adam, though prior in dignity; causative power of regene-
ration not in B. V., but in Christ (ff. 55, 56).
C. 31. Mode 3. — " Universal rule not to extend to one, of
whom the contrary is primarily or consequentially expressed,
especially if any thing be said in favour of one." Ans. But no
contradiction as to time of conception. Not true (as alleged)
that praise in Holy Scripture requires us to explain away
things blameworthy, as to Abraham, Jacob, Sarah, or Egyptian
midwives. The more Scripture praises, the more it blames
what is blamable, as in' David, Solomon (ff. 56 — 59 v.).
C. 32. Mode 4 much the same as 2 ; that " the rule is not
to be extended to privileged person, who (they assert) was pre-
G g2
468 Analysis of Card, de Turrecremata? s
served by singular grace." Ans. The minor assumes the point
at issue. It could only be grounded by a) authentic Scripture,
5) determination of Church, c) testimony of most approved
doctors and Fathers. Reply. Not necessary to show any privi-
lege of the B. V. ; a) because every thing to her praise might
be assumed ; I) because of the Divine maternity, on ground of
which other privileges, not mentioned in holy Scripture, are
believed of her ; c) that it would be self-evident to any not
prejudiced against it. Ans. to a : But it would be to her
praise to believe that she was conceived of the Holy Ghost,
and in possession of everlasting bliss from her conception, &c. ;
to b : That other prerogatives are either expressly contained in
holy Scripture, or derived from it by necessary consequence, as
attested by holy doctors ; to c : This would imply that the chief
teachers of the Church believed what was contrary to sound
sense. Freedom of Christ from original sin, in itself in-
dubitable, is asserted in holy Scripture; much more would
that of B. V., which is not self-evident. Proof as to Christ
(ff. 59 v.— 63).
C. 33. Mode 5. — " The above propositions of holy Scripture
prove that the B. V. contracted orig. sin ' de jure,' not ' de
facto.' " Ans. a) Expression wrong, since there can be no
"jus " to sin. b) Debt is to have orig. righteousness, c) Divine
justice does not punish for doing or contracting what is due.
Holy Scripture speaks not of "jus," but of fact, Obj. It is
meant that she would have contracted it, had she not been
preserved. Ans. Obligation to contract, does not imply fulfil-
ment. No one would say " one was damned," because he
would have been, had he not been preserved. Contradiction to
say, that she contracted " de jure," and the "jus" did not extend
to her. Consistent to say " she did not contract orig. sin, but
would, had she not been preserved ;" not " she contracted it not
in fact, and did contract it de debito vel jure" (if. 63 —
66 v.).
C. 34. Mode 6. — " The authorities are to be understood
causally, or virtually, or aptitudinally, that every one seminally
descended from Adam contracts original sin, causally, when con-
ceived in the way of our corrupt nature, formally, when the
soul of the offspring conceived, by its union with the flesh,
work on the Conception of the B. V. 469
contracts the stain. And that God could stop the second." Ans.
Scripture could not say that one was guilty, if he was so only
potentially, &c. If it might be said of one, it might be said of
all. If soul of B. V. was prevented by grace in first instant,
then it never had any cause, or virtue, or aptitude to contract
orig. sin (ff. 66 v. — 67 v.).
C. 35. Mode 7. — " That orig. sin was contracted ' ante-
cedently,' having in their causes all things necessary to incur
sin, not * consequently,' i. e. completely and in fact." (This
explanation in a sermon in the Council.) Ans. the same, but
specific as to illustrations (if. 67 v. 68 v.).
One answer to all these last. They admit, on authority of
Holy Scripture and the Saints, that the B. V., in some way, de
jure et debito, or habitudinaliter, or causaliter, or antecedenter,
contracted original sin, and are thereby open to all the objections
which they urge (ff. 68 v. 69).
PAET IV.
" Confutation of answers to authorities of Holy Scripture ad-
duced by my colleague in his relation."
C. 36. Auth. JL— Horn. 3, "All have sinned, &c." Obj. 1.
" Said only of actual sins." Ans. fromS. Aug.; "not true of
' all,' unless infants included, who have no actual sin." Obj. 2.
" Glosses say the contrary." Ans. Not so ; authors cited
(P. Lomb., Nic. de Lyra, Nic. de Gorran, Mag. Henry in his
postill, Steph. of Paris). Obj. 3. " If ' all ' is taken of actual
sin, not true of infants ; if of orig., not true of Adam and
Eve." Ans. True of both together (ff. 69—71).
C. 37. Auth. 2.— Eom. 5, " By one man," &c. Arg. " All
propagated from Adam sinned in his sin. But B. V. car-
nally propagated from Adam. Therefore." Obj. "Sons are
said to sin in parents, who suffer punishment for parents'
sin (Lam. 5. 7 ; Ps. 106. 6 ; Dan. 3 and 9)." Ans. «) Then it
might be said " Christ sinned in Adam," Ps. 59. 5. b) Autho-
rities imply that the sons also sinned, c) The contrary evident
from text itself and Fathers on it. d) If said of any, it might
470 Analysis of Card, de Turrecrematd s
be said of all ; contrary to faith. Reply. Meaning of tlie same
predicate often varies according to the subject, a) " Dead to
sin " (Rom. 6) said otherwise of Christ and of us. 5) " "We are
dead" — of Christ, actual death; of us, aptitude or necessity.
c) God true, devil a liar ; God essentially true ; Satan some-
times says true, d) Jews and Greeks all under sin, but dif-
ferent sins in Bom. 1 and 2. Ans. Meaning of predicate varies
as to different subjects, not of individuals, contained in one sub-
ject. Christ dead to or through sin, cannot mean the same
as our being " dead to sin," because Christ was exempted from
sin. "All men are liars ;" surely against faith to argue that
saints in heaven are so ; on earth has one common meaning :
actual sins vary; original sin is one in all (ff. 71 — 74).
C. 38. A#fh. 3.— Eom. 5, " As by the offence of one." Obj.
a) A wrong allegation of S. Aug. de Nat. et Grat., as though he
said, all were not included in sin of first man. V) The sen-
tence of condemnation one thing ; its execution another. B. V.
would be exempted. Ans. (as before) Orig. sin not by sentence
of God, but from sin of first parents (ff. 74 v. — 75 v.).
C. 39. Aufh. 4.— Gal. 3, " Scripture concluded all under
sin." Obj. Said of Moses' law only, which showed sin, did
not justify, and of actual sin. Ans. Moses' law taught it truly ;
authorities include orig. sin (ff. 75 v. 76).
Auth. 5.— Matt. 9. " They that are whole," &c. Obj. The
great employ physicians to prevent illness. Ans. 1) Christ says
it of all men. 2) Angels who were preserved needed not physi-
cian. 3) Grace given ordinarily both to heal and to prevent
(this, de fide). Arg. as to the great, proves not that they are
more sick than others. Auth. of S. Aug., on the universality of
this need of healing, defended (ff. 76, 77).
C. 40. Auth. 6. — Luke 19, "The Son of Man came to
seek and to save that which was lost." Obj. 1. " Lost," to be
taken aptitudinally. Obj. 2. One preserved from sin is equally
"saved" as one set free from sin committed. Obj. 3. Text relates
to calling sinners to repentance, and so not to B. V. Ans. to
1 : Our Lord speaks absolutely ; to 2 : presupposes sin in those
healed ; to 3 : the words cannot be so restrained. So S. Aug.
Auth. 7. — 1 Tim. 1, " Christ Jesus came into the world to
save sinners." Obj. This holds equally, if in such multitudes
work on the Conception of the B. V. 471
one or two were preserved from sin. Ans. (as before) S. Aug.
argues absolutely (if. 77, 77 v.).
C. 41. Aufh. 8.— 1 Tim. 2, " There is One God, and One
Mediator between Grod and man, "Who gave Himself a ransom
for all." Obj. answered below.
Aufh. 9.— 2 Cor. 5, " If one died for all, then were all dead."
Obj. 1. Expos, of words " all dead " manifold. Ans. This
hinders not, that exposition " all dead in sin " is right ; de-
fended out of S. Aug., who holds it essential to Catholic faith.
Obj. 2, "Where said specially, that Christ died for Bl. V. M. as
sinner? Ans. Where said of Joachim, Anne, Joseph, His
brethren ? If of them, then of B. V. too, conceived as they.
Exception not proved. Obj. 3. " Christ," S. Bern, says, "was
crucified for angels ;" so not for sinners only. Ans. Pact denied
(proof later). All S. Aug.'s arguments for orig. sin would
fail. Obj. 4. S. Aug. exempted B. V. from sins. Ans. From
actual, not from orig. sin. Obj. 5. Death, as to B. Y.,. might
be aptitudinal death ; else inconsistent with her being repara-
trix and vivificatrix. Ans. a) S. Paul and S. Aug. speak of
actual death. 6) If preserved in first moment of existence, no
aptitudinal death. c) Interferes not with title reparatrix,
vivificatrix, in sense in which these are understood (ff. 77 v. —
79 v.).
C. 42. Eeply to authorities of S. Aug. S. Aug. had to do
with deniers of grace, objected not to preservation from sin, if
owned to be of grace. Ans. Pelags. denied, 1) original sin,
2) necessity of grace. S. Aug. absolutely affirms orig. sin in all,
leaves it open only, whether one might keep free from actual sin
by grace. If S. Aug. only meant not to object to preservation
from orig. sin by virtue of nature, why do advocates of Imma-
culate Conception so seek to show that B. Y. was not included
in those general sayings, in which, according to them, she would
be included, since by virtue of nature she could not be free
from orig. sin, &c. And other answers (if. 79 v. — 83 v.).
472 Analysis of Card, de Turrecremata's
PAKT V.
In which are put the authorities of Holy Scripture from
which, according to the glosses and expositions loth of the
Saints and other doctors, it is gathered specifically that the
IB. V. contracted original sin.
C. 43. In O. T. a) Type of tabernacle, first formed, then
hallowed; as interpreted by S. Thorn. Aq. I) Job 3, " Let
the stars be obscured in the darkness of the night thereof," as
interpreted by S. Thorn. Aq. and S. Bern, c) Eccl. 7, " One
man of a thousand," &c., as interpreted by Gloss. Ord., Card.
Hugo, Mag. Garric, James of Lausanne, d) Prov. 25,
"Take away the rust," &c., as in Albert. M., James Laus.
and many other postillators.
In N. T. S. Luke i. " The Holy Ghost shall come upon
thee," &c. as in S. Amb., S. Aug., S. John Dam., S. Fulg.,
S. Greg., S. Bern., Bede, Hugo de S. V., P. Lomb., Card. Hugo,
Albert. M., S. Thorn. Aq., S. Bonav., Bertr. de Turre, Ulric.,
Mag. Nic. Gorram (ff. 82 [misprinted 84]— 84).
C. 44. Obj. 1) That the fomes or concupiscentia implies
not the previous existence of original sin. Ans. 1) From the
definition of the fomes. 2) Erom the names given to it — viz.
a) fomes, as fomentum peccati ; b) concupiscentia ; c) con-
cupiscibilitas ; d) languor nature ; e) tyrannus ; /) lex
carnis ; g) lex peccati (as origin of all); 7i) lex membrorum.
3) from answer of S. Aug. to Pelagians and from S. Ambrose ;
4) from grounds given by Saints, why the fomes was not in
Cbrist.
Arguments ~in support of obj. may be reduced to three:
1) that if two things so exist that one may be separated from the
other, but not conversely, one may be in the subject without
the other ; but the fomes may exist in the baptized and original
sin not, and fomes prior in order and more common and uni-
versal. Ans. Briefly (omitting much), a) The 'femes' is not
prior nor the cause of original sin in the same subject. The
disordering of the inferior powers, or the material cause of
orig. sin, is the result of the disordering of the will from God.
b) Though the fomes exists in more than original sin is, not
work on the Conception of the B. V. 473
in more than it has been. Arg. 2) " Absence of original right-
eousness, formal cause of orig. sin, fomes or concupiscence, its
material cause," granted; but the "material" is the less, the
" formal " the more principal. In original righteousness, the
formal cause was the rectitude of will ; the material, the im-
pression of that rectitude on the inferior powers ; by loss of the
formal, the material was lost ; aversion of will then from God is
principal cause, rebellion of inferior powers is the effect. Arg. 3)
That the fomes, as well as the necessity of dying and the like
penalties, are the punishment, not of original sin, personally con-
tracted, but of that which was in the first parent. Ans. Contrary
to Holy Scripture, Fathers, Schoolmen, authority of Bl. V.
herself. S. Luke 1. "My spirit hath rejoiced in God my
Saviour," according to S. Bernard, Hugo de S.V., S. Aug.
(ff. 84—87).
C. 45. Authorities of doctors, who specially attest that the
B. Y. M. contracted orig. sin, and 1st. of S. Aug., with refuta-
tion of nine answers of some to the contrary (f. 87).
1) De Gen. ad lit. c. 10, " What was more undefiled " [see ab.
p. 99], which contains — a) that the Flesh of the B.V. came from
the propago of sin ; I) that she did not conceive Christ from
the propago of sin ; c) that therefore the law in the body of
death, opposed to the law of the mind, did not rage in Him ;
therefore, according to S. Aug., it did in all else. 2) De Gen.
ad lit. ib. "Accordingly, the Body of Christ, although It
was taken from the Flesh of woman, which was conceived from
that very propago of the flesh of sin, was yet not so conceived
in her, as she too was conceived, nor was It flesh of sin, but
* likeness of flesh of sin.' " 3) " According to the seminal
ground, Levi was there," &c. [see ab. p. 99]. 4) Cont. Jul. L. ii.
[ab. p. 65]. 5) Cont. Jul. L. v. [ab. p. 102]. 6) de Bapt.
Parv. L. ii. [ab. p. 98]. 7) de Trin. L. xiii. [ab. pp. 429—435].
8) Serm. Nat. Dom. beg. " Tom. N. J. C." [" made out of various
passages of S. Aug. unneatly strung together," Ben. Serm.
128. App. T. v.]. 9) contra quinque Hserr. L. v. [ab. p. 312,
313]. 10) on Ps. 34 [see ab. p. 100]. 11) on Ps. 70
[ab. p, 430]. 12) on Job. Horn. v. "Behold the Lamb of
God" [see ab. p. 65] (ff. 87—96 v.).
474 Analysis of Card, de Turrecremata? s
PAETVI.
In ivhich are, to the same effect, authorities of other holy
doctors after Augustine, and other excellent Theologians.
C. 46. Eus.Emis. [Gall.] de Nat. Dom. [ab.p. 122.] S. Leo
Ep. ad Flavian, [ab. pp. 434, 435], written to and accepted after
examination by the Council of Chalcedon, contains these four
propositions to our purpose ; 1) that Christ Alone had not the
contagion ; 2) that from the Bl. Virgin was taken nature, not
fault; 3) that Christ Alone was conceived without concupis-
cence ; 4) that in Christ Alone man found himself innocent.
Also from two sermons on the Nativity [ab. pp. 123 — 125]
with answers (ff. 96 v. — 97 v.).
C. 47. S. John Damasc. [ab.p. 148, and p. 435] S. Anselin,
Cur Deus Homo [ab. p. 163]. Obj. 1. The saying was Boso's.
Ans. 1) S. Aiiselm accepts it. 2) He says the same in his own
person. Obj. 2. It is un-Catholic, saying she was lorn in orig.
sin. Ans. True as to fomes (as in S. Aug., Gloss., Bede,
S. Thorn., P. Lomb.). Ans. to passages alleged from de Cone.
Virg. c. 10 [ab. pp. 366, 367] (ff. 97 v.— 99 v.).
C. 48. S.Maximus Taurin. [ab. p.431]Boethius [ab. pp. 335—
337].
S. Gregory, in Ezek. Horn. 8, M. Mor. L. xxv. c. 1. xi. fin.
[ab. p. 142] (ff. 99 v.— 100 v.).
C. 49. Hugo de S. Viet, de Sacr. L. i. p. 8 [see more ab.
pp. 177, 178]. A S. Bernard [?],a Bishop [ab. p. 435].
S. Bernard, in serm. on the Assumpt. [ab. p. 176].
Obj. 1. S. Bernard spoke conditionally, "Quod si." Ans.
But, anyhow, positively, in context and elsewhere.
Obj. 2. That on the part of the parents the B. V. was so
conceived. Ans. 1) Intention of parents holy ; 2) S. Bern.
says it of her own person ; 3) that she was cleansed.
Obj. 3. That "trahere" is different from " contrahere."
Ans. Denied. Fulg. uses "trahere" as "contrahere." One
descended from lepers, could not be said "traxisse lepram," if
preserved from it.
Obj. 4. S. Bern, said, Mary had no sin "proprium," but
orig. sin is " proprium." Ans. " Proprium " in S. Bern, is
manifestly actual sin.
work on the Conception of the B. V. 475
Serai, on Nat. of S. John B. in S. Bern. [ab. pp. 168, 197].
Serm. in Vig. of Nat. of our Lord [see ab. p. 436] (ff. 100
v.— 102).
0. 50. Ep. to Canons of Lyons [ab. pp. 171—175] (f. 102 v.).
C. 51. Obj. 1.— Story of black spot [ab. pp. 191, 192].
Ans. Contrary to history, and other answers.
Obj. 2. That he did not assert it, since he submitted the
whole to Apost. See. Others so submitted, what still they
asserted.
Obj. 3. That it related to the Cone, seminis, not naturarum.
Ans. The contrary is evident (S. 103, 104).
C. 52. S. Thomas Aq., with commendation of his doctrine
from Univ. Paris. He quotes iii. d. 3. art. 1. 3 P. q. 27. art. 2.
Quodl. 6. q. 7. Comp. Theol., beg. JEterni Patris verbum,
cap. de sanctif. matr. Dei, c. 22. Expos, salutat. Aug. [In fol.
104 v. he speaks of " six passages " of S. Thomas, as meaning
apparently to quote them, but there are only five, including
the Comp. Theol.] (ff. 104 v.— 108 v.);
C.53. Offices of many Churches [ab. pp. 255, 256; 374—377]
(ff. 106, 107 v.).
C. 54. Distinctions alleged : H. Scr., in ambiguous passages,
for its harmonizing and sound understanding, admits fourfold
distinction in — 1) difference of time ; 2) office ; 3) person ; and
4) disposition. Instances : statements as to ark, 1 Kings 8, and
Heb. 9 ; John B. prophet and not prophet ; Elias and not
Elias. In " All gone out of the way," not of acts, but of habi-
tual or necessary disposition or inclination of corrupt nature
thereto. So, "Everyman a liar," commonly. "All we like sheep,"
&c. Innoc. III., in decretal, limited " He that believeth not
shall be damned," to adults, as alone capable of belief. So it
may be said, that B. Y. was conceived in sin, taking — 1) con-
ception as "commixtio seminum," and "peccatuin" largely,
as Bern, seems, for fervor libidinis, or vitiosa corruptio carnis ;
or, 2) original sin, for penalty of sin, i. e. vicious corruption of
nature, not for " wanting of orig. righteousness;" or, 3) from
likeness in mode of conception and its penalties ; or, 4) apti-
tudinally, i. e. taking orig. sin largely, as a necessary disposition
on the part of corrupt nature thereto. And this might be
said as to the past, on account of a certain aptitude in itself,
476 Analysis of Card, de Turrecrematd* s
though not in act. So angels said, Job 10, not to be " stabiles,"
not being so by mere nature, as God Alone to have immor-
tality, i. e. by His own Nature ; and under the words, " To
whom much is forgiven, he loveth much," those preserved from
sin are included, as having had it remitted. Specific answers
to Ep. of S. Bern.
The arguments reducible to five : —
Obj. 1. That H. Scr. admits that what it speaks of as done
[actuin], should be referred, not to the actual, but the habitual
disposition of the person, whether past or future.
Obj. 2. That one may be said to be conceived in orig. sin
by reason only of the aptitudinal disposition to contract it,
although in act he never contracted it.
Obj. 3. That sometimes a disposition to sin, or some morbid
quality in the seed or in the flesh, is called original sin.
Obj. 4. That a thing, on account of its natural disposition
alone to another thing, takes the name of that thing whereto
it disposes.
Obj. 5. That, on the ground of the likeness of penalties to
those who contract original sin, it may be granted that she was
conceived in original sin.
Ans. to 1) No such instance in H. Scr. Glosses include orig.
sin in its sayings, Innoc. only reciting opinion. On same prin-
ciple all orig. sin might be denied, while only admissible if
contrary said in clearer places of Scr. If grace given to B. V.
at first instant, there was no such habitual disposition ; to 2)
S. Anselm speaks not of aptitudinal disposition, but of certainty
that child, when it receives its soul, will have defilement of sin ;
to 3) Meaning of S. Anselm and S. Bernard the same as the
rest, that since, in punishment of the Fall, conception is not
without passion, thence children born with orig. sin ; 4) involves
manifold absurdities. Any saint might so be called wicked,
as having the dispositions inclining thereto. As to instances,
Hezekiah could not have been said to have died, nor Nineveh
to have been overthrown ; "mobilis" or " instabilis," as said
of angels, expresses liability, not act. S. Aug. only says, that
those preserved from sin owed to God same thankfulness as
those forgiven ; 5) would, a) open the door to Pelagiauism ;
I) Christ Alone had likeness of sinful flesh only ; c) sin being
work on the Conception of the B. V. 477
in the soul, those resemblances to others in the body no ground
for saying that she contracted not orig. sin ; d) no one derives
penalty without sin. T. sums up these answers. — " It will be
of no little use to consider and weigh with what zeal, labour,
ability, the proposer on the other side strove to seek out so
many various ways of speech, whereby it could be granted
that the B. V. contracted original sin, saying, now, that she
contracted it by condition of nature ; now, from the mode of
propagation ; now, taking original sin largely ; now, taking con-
ception for conception of seeds ; now, putatively ; now, by
assimilation. And why this variety of speech ? Plainly in
order, by one or the other way, to escape those very plain
sayings of Scripture and the holy Fathers " (ff. 107 v. — 113 v.).
To attempts to explain away S. Bernard, he alleges that
Alex, de Hales, Albertus M., S. Thomas Aq., S. Bonav.,
understood him to deny that B. V. was sanctified in concep-
tion, and argues from the Ep. itself (if. 114 — 115 v.).
C. 55. Bede [ab. pp. 147, 148] ; Cassiodorus [ab. pp. 137 —
139] ; Hugo a S. Viet. [ab. pp. 176—178] ; Eich. de S. Yict.
[ab. pp. 185—189] ; Abbot Odo [ab. p. 184] ; Peter Comestor
[ab. p. 437] ; Alanus in expos, of Athan. Creed [ab. pp. 210,
211] ; P. Lombard [ab. pp. 181—183] ; Joh. Valleti, i. e.
Beleth [ab. p. 167] ; Anonym, in his Summa [ab. p. 437] ;
"William Bp. of Auxerre [ab. p. 213] ; Prsepositivus [ab.
pp. 211, 212] ; "William, Chanc. of Paris [ab. p. 209] ; Henry
of Ghent [ab. pp. 234—236] ; Abp. of Armagh [ab. p. 438];
Joh. de Poliaco [ab. pp. 249, 250] ; Wm. Durand [ab. pp. 205
—207] (ff. 116—118 v.).
C. 56. Dominicans. — Card. Hugo de S. Caro [ab. pp. 278,
279] ; Hugo G-allicus, Abp. and Card, of Ostia [ab. pp. 241,
242] ; Albertus M. [ab. pp. 166, 216, 217] ; Peter de Tarantasia
[ab. pp. 230—232] ; James de Voragine [ab. p. 268] ; Ulricus
Arg. [ab. pp. 236—238] ; Peter de Palude [ab. p. 438] ; James
of Lausanne [ab. pp. 272, 273] ; John of Paris [ab. p. 214] ;
John of Naples [ab. pp. 242—245] ; Thomasinus [ab. p. 440] ;
Hugo de Arg. [ab. p. 227] ; Nic. Treveth [ab. p. 258] ; Ber-
nard of Clermont [ab. p. 441] (f. 119 v.). Eob. Holcoth
[ab.p.441] ; Thomas de Walleis, Angl. [ab. p. 442] ; Peter de
Palma [ab. p. 282] ; Martin. Polon. [ab. pp. 266—268] ; Nic.
478 Analysis of Card, de Turrecremata? s
Gorram. [ab. p. 444]; Win., Abp. of Lyons [ab. p. 265];
John of Genoa [ab. pp. 233, 234] ; Wm. of Alton [ab. p. 279] ;
Vincent. Historialis [ab. p. 445] ; James of Beneventum [Ib.] ;
Jon. de Verdiaco [Varsiaco, ab. pp. 277, 278] ; Joh. of Luxem-
burg [ab. p. 446] ; Joh. Steringacius Teutonicus [Sterngasse,
or Sperngasse, [Ib.] (ff. 118 v.— 120 v.).
C. 57. Franciscans. — Alex, de Ales [ab. p. 214—216] ; S.
Bonaventura [ab. pp. 217—220] ; Rich. Middleton [ab. p. 238] ;
Keginald, Abp. of Eouen [ab. p. 241] ; Thorn, de Ales [p. 271] ;
Joh. Eicardi [ab. p. 253] ; Bertrand de Turre [ab. pp. 273,
274] ; Nic. de Lyra [ab. pp. 275—277] ; Alvarus Pelag. [ab.
pp. 253—257] ; ^Egidius Zamor. [ab. p. 232] ; John of La
Eochelle [ab. p. 264] ; Eob. Conton [ab. p. 447] ; Br. Lucas Pad.
[ab. p. 265] ; Barth. de Pisis [ab. p. 447] ; Gerard. Odouis (i. q.
Odo de Castro Eodulphi) [ab. p. 264] ; James de Casali
[ab. p. 448] ; Conrad Sax. [ab. p. 268] (ff. 120 v.— 123 v.).
C. 58. Augustinians. — ^Egidius Eom. [ab. pp. 239—241] ;
Greg, de Arim. [ab. p. 260] ; Bernard Oliveri [ab. p. 448] ;
John Teut. [ab. p. 449 ] ; Jordanes Teut. [ab. p. 274] ; Henri
de Vrimaria [ab. pp. 449, 450] ; John Liniros [prob. Clivoth]
of Saxony [ab. p. 451] ; John Setringarius [ab. p. 452] (ff.
123 v.— 124 v.).
C. 59. Carmelites. — Guido of Perpignan [pp. 245 — 247] ;
Paul de Perusio [ab. pp. 257, 258] (f. 124 v.).
Cistercians. — Ludolphus Sax. [ab. pp. 271, 272] ; John
Calcar. [ab. p. 453] ; P. of Fountain Abbey [ab. pp. 283, 284] ;
Author of Sermones Soccii [ab. p. 454] ; Anonym. (Eichard
of S. Laur.) [ab. pp. 261, 262] ; Jo. Monachus [ab. p. 454] ;
Mag. Garricus [ab. p. 455] ; Hannibaldus [ab. pp. 229, 230] ;
Mag. Stephanus [ab. p. 283] (ff. 124 v.— 325 v.).
C. 60. Canonists.— John Teutonicus [ab. p. 202] ; Barth,
Brix. [ab. p. 199] ; Mag. Joh. [ab. p. 209] ; Hugo [ab. p. 199] ;
Eaimund [ab.p.203] ; Hostiensis [ab.p. 204]; Gul. Duran. [ab.
p. 205] ; Jo. Andr. [ab. p. 208] ; Guido Archidiac. [ab. p. 207] ;
John de Calderinis [ab. p. 209]; Peter dePrato [" Braco "
de B.]; Peter of Milan ; Joan. (Summa, 1. i. tit. 12), Barth.
de Concordio [ab. p. 207] (ff. 125 v.— 126).
work on the Conception of the B. V. 479
PAET VII.
Value of these authorities.
C. 61. Many more expositors, writers on the Sentences, writers
in praise of B. V., not alleged, because names not known. Obj.
Authority of doctors far below that of Councils, therefore other
nameless authorities on opposite side of the same value. Ans.
1) Canon law says, gravity of witnesses is to be weighed.
2) Authorities, cited by T., alleged in General Councils and in
this against Bohemians. Obj. Knowledge of faith and of H.
Scr., like every other science, is increased in time. Ans. a) In
sciences, substance of knowledge increases ; in Theology, later
articles are implicitly contained in earlier. This is not the
revelation of things unknown (which were possible), but con-
tradiction (which is impossible). Obj. In the Clementines,
sayings of Saints and modern Doctors of Theology singled oub.
Ans. Not in contrast with old, against Scr. Prov. 22, Zosim.,
Decretals, &c. J) These "moderns" were P. Lomb., Alex.
Ales, S. Thomas, who are on this side (ff. 126 v.— 128).
C. 62. Grounds of Dominicans, although devoted to B. V.
1) Prerog. of Christ, to be alone conceived without orig. sin.
2) Scr., that all born in way of nature are conceived in orig. sin.
3) The fathers. 4) The faith of the Church, as shown in
Breviaries. 5) General representative Councils. Letter of
Pope Leo, accepted by Council of Chalc. 6) Apostol. See,
Pope Zosimus. 7) Most Doctors of Theol. and Canon law.
8) Zeal for the integrity of honour of God our Saviour, and so
of His V. M. 9) Teaching of S. Dominic, to hold to Scr., the
[Fathers, and common doctrine of Church. 10) Opposite
doctrine not expressly founded on Scr. or Fathers, but
opposed to both (ff. 128, 129 v.).
C. 63. Grounds from twenty prerogatives of Christ. 1) Alone
not conceived of unclean seed, Job 24 ; 2) Fairer than the sons
of men, Ps. 45, Heb. 1 ; 3) "Anointed above His fellows," ib. ;
4) "Free among the dead," Ps. 88 ; 5) "Who among the sons
of God is like unto God?" Ps. 89; 6) Cant. 2. 1; 7) Isa.
4. 2; 8) Isa. 11. 1 ; 9) Jer. 31. 22; 10) "The holy of holies,"
Dan. 9; 11) "Born of the Holy Ghost," Matt. 1; 12) "My
480 Analysis of Card, de Turrecremata? s
well-beloved Son, in "Whom," &c. Matt. 3. 17 ; 13) " The Holy
Thing born of thee," Luke 1 ; 14) "Lamb of God," John 1 ;
15) "He Who is from above," &c. John 3. 31 ; 16) "Likeness
of sinful flesh," Eom. 8; 17) "Firstborn among many breth-
ren," t&.; 18) "One new man," Eph. 2. 15; 19) Eom. 7. 2;
20) " Lord of lords," Eev. 19 (largely supported by Fathers
and middle-age writers) (ff. 130—134 v.).
C. 64. Grounds for the same, derived from prerogatives of
the Conception of Christ in H. Scr.
1) " Sinless, because from a virgin," Isa. 7. 2) Ground from
Isa. 19. 1; 53. 2. Eev. 7. 2 (as explained in Gloss); 3) Of the
Holy Ghost, Matt. 1, Luke 1 ; (coll. John 12) ; 4) The new-
ness as being alone free from sin (coll. S. Leo and S. Bern.) ;
5) The first which was clean (coll. S. Greg.) ; 6) Its aloneness.
Obj. It would have had prerogatives still, notwithstanding
Imm. Cone. Ans. True as to Himself, not as to His parent
or His own Conception. Hence purity is the basis of all
(ff. 134 v.— 136 v.).
C. 65. Grounds from special prerogatives ascribed to B. V.
1) Purity of her conception of Christ ; 2) Blessedness of Fruit
of her womb through immunity from sin ; 3) Her sanctification.
[Obj. She could be said to be purged and sanctified, though
spotless, coll. a) John 15. 2, Luke 2. 22, Acts 21. 26 ; I) S. Ans.
" B. V. purified by faith of Incarnation ;" c) Heb. 7. 26
of Christ ; d) Dionys. Areop. of angels. Ans. B. V. not said
simply to be purified, but purified from orig. sin ; use as to Bl.
Angels different in kind: use of word assumed contrary to
received language. OurBl. Lord is said not to be " purified,"
but " separate from sinners "] ; 4) sanctified from fomes in
Conception of Christ ; but this implies fore-existence of orig.
sin (ff. 136 v.— 140 v.).
C. 66. From the condition of her propagation from our first
parents; 1) because conceived in ordinary way; 2) because
carnally conceived, as John 3. 6, " That which is born of
flesh is flesh," with authorities and refut. of contrary ; 3) from
being tithed in loins of Abr., according to S. Aug., &c. (ff. 141
—146).
C. 67. From penalties, to which B. Y. was subject.
1) The ordinary sufferings of mortality, even before use of
work on the Conception of the B. V. 481
reason (argt. of Aug. against Pelagians) ; 2) her mortality ;
3) (in support of this) her death, not being for the sins of
men; 4) she died for sin of Adam, Rom. 8. 5) Christ Alone
died, being free from debt of death ; 6) pcena damni, i. e. loss of
Divine vision, unless Christ had opened heaven; 7) (in con-
firmation). " Had the B. V. died before Death of Christ, she
would not have entered heaven then " (authorities, Aug. Inno-
cent III.). Obj. Man naturally mortal ; even Christ would have
died of old age, if not crucified. Ans. Man, before sin, mortal,
but would not have died (Bom. 5, G). Christ did not contract,
i. e. derive, these penalties together with the cause thereof, but
assumed them, that He might suffer. Obj. Po3na damni, alone
due to original sin. Ans. Poena sensus in time ; poena damni
in eternity. Obj. G-od leaves the penalty, though He forgives
orig. sin to the baptized ; so, although He preserved the B. V.
from it. Ans. It is just to leave penalties of forgiven sin, not
of sin not contracted. Obj. to 7. But Moses saw Grod in this
life, and Christ from the instant of His Conception. But
Moses's vision passing, not habitual ; to Christ, heaven was not
shut, since He did not sin in Adam (If. 146 v. — 151 v.).
PAET VIII.
C. 68. Arguments from some titles of Christ, indicating the
universality of His saving influence, in respect of the whole
human race. Pew only of these names taken, for conciseness.
1) Jesus, or Saviour, a) " "Who shall save His People," i. e. the
whole world, "from their sin." "Whence S. Aug. argues that
infants have orig. sin, having no other to be saved from.
b) He "came to seek and to save that which was lost;" but to
be preserved from sin, is not to be saved from sin, as, to be pre-
served from perishing is not to be saved, having perished : also
Isa. 49. 25. But texts must be explained of all alike ; else no
limits to exception. 2) Redeemer; but all for whom He gave
Himself for a redemption had some sin, from which they were
redeemed (if. 151 v.— 152 v.).
C. 69. a) Prom force of term " redemption," opposed to man's
being " sold under sin ;" but from this we were bought by
H h
482 Analysis of Card, de Turrecremata's
the precious Blood of Christ ; for to redeem, i. e. buy back,
implies alienation ; we, having been Grod's, had by sin become
Satan's. Obj. 1) Redemption may be only gift of grace to one
who had lost it ; 2) Redemption and preservation not con-
trasted ; for a) redemption implies continued preservation. V)
Angels said to have been redeemed ; 3) Micah 6, people said to
have been redeemed who never were in Egypt. Unborn children
manumitted. Ans. to 1, anyhow redemption from slavery can-
not be ; to 2, redemption and preservation at the same time are
contradictories ; angels not said to be redeemed as man was ;
to 3, corporate body was redeemed, which remains the same,
though members change. Manumission not redemption, for a)
redemption only of living thing ; 5) manumission, freeing of
one's own ; redemption, recovery of what is another's.
1) Redemption so used in H. Scr. Luke 1, " Sent redemp-
tion to His people ;" Gal. 5, " To redeem those under the law ;"
Tit. 2, " To redeem us from all iniquity." c) On authority of
Pope Zosimus. " No one can be said to be redeemed, who was
not before really captive of sin." d) Gloss. Pope S. Greg.,
S. Bern. " Thomas Aq. and common consent, that no one is
redeemed by the Blood and Satisfaction of Christ, who was not
before captive of sin" (ff. 153—159).
C. 70. Obj. There are six modes of redemption from sin; 1)
from actual mortal sin ; 2) from venial sin ; 3) from original
sin, by Baptism or sanctification in the womb ; 4) by being
preserved from falling into mortal sin, or 5) into venial sin, or
6) into original sin. Auth. for 4: Ps. 33, "The Lord shall
redeem the souls, of His saints" (by the Blood of Christ),
"and they who hope in Him shall not fail." So authorities.
Obj. 2. "The more one gains from the fruit of redemption, the
more may he be said to be redeemed;" or, "if redemption be
from actual sins, the more sins, the more redeemed," fallacies.
Redemption single act ; s_uch not more redeemed, but redeemed
from more ; to receive more of the grace of God after redemp-
tion does not imply being more redeemed. Ans. to 5 and 6 follows
from 4. Obj. " Unless B. V. was preserved from orig. sin, she
was not most perfectly redeemed, nor would Christ have been
the most perfect Redeemer." Ans. Preservation no redemption
at all ; then, too, Christ would not be the most perfect
work on the Conception of the B. F. 483
Redeemer of world, which He did not so redeem, and many
other corollaries, as "the world would have been more perfectly
redeemed by Christ, had it been preserved from sin," &c. ; con-
trariwise, the B. V. most perfectly redeemed by fore- deliverance
from orig. sin. Mode of redemption of man most perfect, on
six grounds ; 1) the most perfect Person of Redeemer, God-
Man ; 2) the most precious Price ; 3) the most perfect love ;
4) the most perfect institution and reintegratioii of dignity of
man ; 5) the multitude redeemed, all redeemed most perfectly ;
and 6) from all. So our Lord and Saviour J. C. is to be adored,
Who, being the most perfect, with most perfect love did by most
perfect Price redeem the whole human race from all evil. If
preservation from orig. sin the most perfect, then more perfect
still is preservation from its penalties, more perfect to preserve
all mankind from it (ff. 159—162).
C. 71. Arg. 1. "If the one extreme exists, therefore the other.
But there are, who have always been and will be vessels of wrath,
therefore was one, who was always vessel of mercy." But
fallacy in "always;" for to be vessel of mercy is to be made
such, and so had beginning, as to have been reconciled, healed,
redeemed, washed, of which one could not say, he was so always
(f. 162 v.).
Arg. 2. "If both extremes exist, therefore the mean. But
Christ, Who neither had nor could have orig. sin, one extreme ;
man, who could have and had it, the other. Therefore the mean,
the B. V., who could have had it, but had it not. Ans. But con-
ception is either supernatural, as our Lord's, or natural ; but
orig. sin follows natural conception.
C. 72. " All mankind would think it a more perfect redemp-
tion, if the human race had been restored to, and confirmed
by grace in, a state of innocence, and souls were born in
original righteousness. Redemption, then, maybe preservation
from future evil." But redemption is of individual soul, and
implies change in it. Such, then, could not be said to be
redeemed as we are (f. 163).
C. 73. Arg. from instances : 1) unborn offspring redeemed ; 2)
fruits of 2nd or 3rd year, if mortgaged ; or, 3) one adjudged to
death, if pardoned. (1 and 2 irrelevant to redemption by Christ ;
3 inaccurate, freed but not redeemed.) 4) " Christ redeemed us
H h 2
484 Analysis of Card, de Turrecremata's
from everlasting death, and so from something future." Ans.
We are redeemed from the guilt and due of eternal death,
which is past ; but orig. sin could not be due, since it is contrary
to due, nor could the B. Y. have this debt before her conception,
since she was not ; nor, on the hypothesis, in first instant of
conception, since (ex hypoth.) she was in grace. Also, if B. V.
was redeemed from eternal death, she had orig. sin, since it is
only due to sin. So as to temporal punishment, redemption was
completed at Resurrection, and so we are "redeemed in hope "
of its completion ; but to approach thus the end of perfected
redemption, and to be preserved from all sin, are contradictions
(ff. 164—166).
C. 74. From reason : 1) He is redeemed more efficaciously,
who is more freed from servitude, who is forecome from being
slave, than he who is first allowed to be under slavery, and
then freed. 2) The more accelerated is passive redemption,
the more efficacious. Ans. Such not redeemed at all. 3) Christ
redeemed us from the curse of the law ; but we were never
under it ; Ans. Nor were any but Jews at anytime. 4) Satan
is bound now, and has less power ; are we less redeemed ?
Ans. Satan has less power, because we are redeemed from
sin, which made us his captives (ft'. 166, 167).
C. 75. Scripture passages alleged, in proof that " redeemed"
may mean simply preserved, 2 Kings 7, Exod. 13, God redeemed
Himself a people; (answered as before), of real deliverance
from actual servitude. Ps. 49 and 30, " God shall redeem my soul
from the power of hell. Thou hast brought my soul out of hell."
Isa. 43, " I have redeemed thee." Hos. 13, " I will redeem thee
from death." Ans. Redemption by Christ. Ps. 23, " Shalt
deliver his soul from hell," not redemption by price (ff. 167 —
168 v.).
C. 76. Church and Angels only redeemed by being pre-
served.
Ans. As to Church : It has been redeemed from sin in all its
members, being subject to sin, though not all at once. Coll.
Luke 3, " Redeemed His people." Matt. 1, " Shall save His
people from their sins." Eph. 8, " He is the Saviour of the
body. Christ loved the Church, and gave Himself for her "
(ff. 168 v.— 169 v.).
work on the Conception of the B. V. 485
Ans. As to Angels : Redemption used by S. Bernard in
different sense. Christ died and was crucified for the B. V. as
for the whole human race, not for the Angels (though opponents
said it, it is marvellous whence they had it), or gave ransom
for them, or reconciled them. Christ's redemption of man
filled up ranks of Angels, &c. (ff. 169 v., 170 v.).
C. 77. Minute objections to passage of S. Thomas.
Why said S. Thomas that the exemption of any one would
derogate from the honour of the passion of Christ ? Ans. As
contradicting S. Paul, " He is the Saviour of all men," and the
like (ff. 170 v.— 172 v.).
PART IX.
C. 78. Mediator. — All for whom Christ was a Mediator,
must have had some sin. Office of mediator to reconcile two
estranged. Obj. " Christ would not be most perfect Mediator,
unless He preserved one," repeated in different forms. Media-
tion between those estranged, and preservation from being
estranged, incompatible.
Reconciler. — 2 Cor. 5, " God was in Christ, reconciling the
world to Himself;" and Rom. 5, "We were reconciled to God
by the Death of His Son."
Physician. — Whom Christ healed by medicine of His Passion
must have been sick. "By His stripes," &c. "They that
are whole," &c.
Justifier. — Jer. 23, Rom. 3. Obj. To be justified does not
imply previous guilt (instances cited relative to God, Ps. 51,
Eccles. 18, Ps. 50, Luke 7, Us : and of man, Rev. 22, " And
let him that is just be yet more justified." Ans. The justifi-
cation here spoken of was through the Blood of Christ.
Sanctifier. — 1 Cor. 1, "made to us Sanctification," &c. ;
1 Cor. 6, "But ye have been sanctified ;" Heb. 13, "That He
might sanctify His people by His Blood."
Cleanser. — Mai. 3, Ps. 51, Rev. 1, " cleansed us from our sins
with His own Blood ;" Rev. 7, " washed their robes in Blood
of the Lamb." But the clean not washed by preservation from
defilement.
486 Analysis of Card, de Turrecremata? s
Shepherd. — But He came to seek the sheep which were gone
astray — the whole human race.
Priest. — Heb. 9, " By His own Blood He entered once into
the holy place," &c., quoting Council of Eph. (if. 172—175 v.).
C. 79. Grounds on which some doctors thought her concep-
tion in orig. sin true and Catholic assertion, from Hugo
de S. V., P. Lombard, S. Thomas, S. Bonaventura, and the
rest.
That assertion is to be held true, the opposite of which con-
tradicts—I) H. Scripture; 2) the determination of the whole
Church [the Council of Milevis] ; 4) sayings of H. Scripture,
as understood by holy doctors ; 5) determination of Apostolic
See [Pope Zosimus] ; or, 6) which follows by necessary in-
ference from what holy doctors pronounce to be indubitable,
and bid to be firmly held, and which as such is placed in the
body of Decretals ; or, 7) the opposite of which derogates from
the dignity of Christ and His privileges (ff. 175 v.— 177 v.).
C. 80. Answer to objections to the conclusions of 'C. 79.
i. " It is nowhere expressly said in special terms, that the
B. V. was conceived in original sin." Ans. 1. No more are
many other Catholic truths. Perilous principle to affirm that
those things only are Catholic faith, which are comprehended
in express and special terms in H. Scr. or determinations of
the Church. Eor countless others are elicited from them
equally firm. Nor is it absurd (as alleged) to make no dif-
ference herein between the B. V. and the worst of men ; for
the Ap. says, Eom. 3, "There is no difference; all lack the
glory of Q-od." Nor is it necessary (as is alleged) that the
deduction should be as evidently known to all, as that where-
from it is deduced, except perhaps in things to be believed ex-
plicitly. Also, it is one thing to say that a saying is Catholic,
another, that all Christians are bound to believe it of necessity
of faith. One has not to believe every assertion said to be
Catholic, unless it be expressly laid down in H. Scr., or plainly
deduced from it, or determined by the Church to be such.
Ans. 2. It is expressed in equivalent terms in Scr. authorities,
so explained by the Fathers.
ii. " Since * one doubtful in faith is an infidel,' all who doubt
of this -would have to be called infidels." Ans. The maxim
work on the Conception of the B. V. 487
belongs to things expressed in H. Scr., or determined by the
Church to be held explicitly.
iii. " Who does not bring back from errors, when he can,
shows that he errs himself. But Roman Church and general
Councils have used no diligence to bring people bask from belief
in Imm. Cone." Ans. The saying relates to manifest error
against express Scr. or determination of Church.
iv. " Sermons on Imm. Cone, preached yearly on this Pest.
in many parts of Christian religion in presence of Clergy and
people, unhindered (as before). Rom. Ch., then, and general
Councils, not opposing this, approved it, and so Church for
many centuries continuously was in error as to faith." Ans. 1)
as before. 2) Imm. Cone, not preached for many centuries (as
often stated), since Card. Bonaventura says he had never heard
of it (see ab. p. 220). So then, neither at Rome nor Univ.
of Paris.
v. " Cardinals, Bishops, and all the chiefs of curia at Rome,
celebrate annually F. of Cone, under name of Cone., and
sermons preached on it as being Immaculate."
Ans. 1) Roman Church or Apostolic See has not instituted,
canonized, pronounced, or celebrated it, or had it marked in the
Calendar. Not what Cardinals, &c. do, acts of Rom. Ch., but
when supreme Pontiff, with College of Cardinals, publicly cele-
brates and keeps the Feast. Roman Ch., then, has rather
refused to keep the Feast. Ans. 2) It is to be supposed that
Card., &c. keep F. as E. of the Sanctification, which is believed to
have followed the Cone, after slight delay, quoting Alvarus, " for
many years Penitentiary in Roman Court." The Sanctifica-
tion must the more be object of festival, not Conception, since
Cone, on Dec. 8 was Cone, seminum, and the B. Y. (i. e. her
soul) as yet was not. It might as well be argued, that Church
encouraged belief that B. V. was sanctified before animation
(condemned by Bern, and Univ. Paris).
vi. " The Council of Basle itself had sanctioned it by having
the office and Sermons for Imm. Cone." Ans. These were acts
of individual fathers; the contrary also done, and many exorbi-
tances against the Pope.
vii. " Held commonly that the F. of Nativity of B. V. cele-
brated her sanctification. If F. of Cone, the same, two Festivals
488 Analysis of Card, de Turrecremata? s
on same subject." Ans. 1) Church has instituted F. of Nat.,
only permitted this; in many Churches this is not F. of Cone.,
nor is the sanctification the direct object of F. of Nativ.; held also
that F. of Cone, was a F. of thanksgiving (John of Naples, ab,
p. 244). Custom no ground against opposed teaching in the
Church, "Jesus said, ' I am the truth,' not < I am custom,' "
Greg. VII.
viii. "It was argued, 'Roman Church does not keep F. of Cone.,
therefore the B. Y. conceived in orig. sin;' now Horn. Ch. does
celebrate it, argument reversed." Ans. Argt. not used, nor
fact true.
ix. " S. Bernard referred question to Roman See ; therefore
not already article of faith." Ans. No ; but it might be Catho-
lic truth.
x. Same argument from its being proposed at C. of Basle
(ff. 177 v— 181 v.).
C. 81. Answers to arguments for Imm. Cone, from Divine
power.
Arg. 1) that she could ; 2) that it was most fitting; 3) that
she ought ; 4) that she was so preserved.
Ans. Wrong definition of " potentia ordinata " of God, viz.
"a certain congruity of the Divine goodness (according to the
exigency or attingency of our reason) nowise narrowing the
Divine Will, that it should not justly and reasonably do the
opposite, though our intellect cannot equally see both." For
1) our reason no measure; 2) since these congruities vary,
there would be as many potentia3 ordinatae, which no school
admits ; 3) variety of opinion on this very point. Better to sny
absolute power of God is whatever does not involve contradic-
tion, or tend to defect of power ; " poteutia ordinata " is, what
He not only can do absolutely, but wills in His wisdom to do.
Hence power of God absolute or conditioned, that it be not
1) against the law which in His goodness He placed in us (as, to
reward the wicked, punish the bad) ; 2) against the order
which His wisdom has constituted and laid down for us in
II. Scr. Thus, supposing the pre-ordination of Passion of
Christ, impossible that man should be redeemed in any other
way; supposing He willed that Christ should be Redeemer,
impossible that any should not have sin. Authorities.
work on the Conception of the B. V. 489
Obj. 1. " God might give dispensation, as all makers of law,
or Ahasuerus to Esther, or sovereign Pontiff, or God as to His
positive laws." Ans. " It does not hold, that if some law may
be dispensed with, all may. If B. Y. could be dispensed, a
great multitude might." Laws of first table could not, as con-
taining relation of creature to Creator. Evidence of reason
taken from H. Scr. supports, not this, but the contrary. There
is no law, instituted by God, as to contracting orig. sin.
Obj. 2. " If God could not preserve the B. V., it must be by
reason of His wisdom, or justice, or omnipotence. But not for
lack of any. Ans. Division insufficient; contrary not to these,
but to the order instituted by Divine Wisdom.
Obj. 3. Luke 1, "With God nothing is impossible:" Ans.
Spoken of God's absolute power, not of " potentia ordinata."
Impossible the whole Trinity should be incarnate, or that men
should be saved, otherwise than by the Death of the Son of
God (ff. 184, 185).
C. 82. Answer to arguments, that it was " becoming " that
the B. Y . should be so preserved. " Becoming " defined, though
inadequately, " beauty befitting, not necessary to condition."
Ground from first prerogative, " because she is \irgo vir-
ginum ;" distinction, because a thing is becoming, it does not
therefore become God to give it.
Immunity from orig. sin not necessary ornament of vir-
ginity, else none would have it. Christ Alone the Lamb,
not whose spot has been wiped away, but who had no spot.
What is essential to virginity ? " Integritas carnis cum in-
tegritate mentis."
Arg. 2. If B. V. had not been so preserved, her virginity would
have been not perfect, but minished. For virginity of mind
is corrupted by any mortal sin. Ans. a) No virginity
antecedent to original sin; for soul created when infused:
b) original sin, not mortal.
Arg. 3. Virginity of mind, as of body, cannot be restored.
Ans. Not true, else there would be no virgin.
Arg. 4. Perfect innocence becomes virginity, such as Christ's ;
hers, then, should be like His. Ans. a) Christ Alone in likeness
of sinful flesh ; b) purity of Reconciler and reconciled not the
same, since reconciled from sin.
490 Analysis of Card, de Turrecrematd 's
Arg. 5. The Church a virgin in such wise that there ' never
was nor shall be in her spot or wrinkle ;' so also B. V. Ans. a)
Pure, for Christ washed it with His Blood (Eph. 5; Eev. 1),
yet all from Abel had original sin. I) Freedom of Church
from all spot relates to life to come, since Church made up of
its members; and "if we say we have no sin," &c. ; Church
indeed free from stain of mortal sin in true members.
Arg. 6. Prom S. Bernard, In Kev. the moon under her feet
means the Church or corruption. Ans. 1) S. Bernard's meaning
to be sought from his plain words, not from obscure or meta-
phoric ; 2) S. Bern., from context, is speaking of time of Incarn. ;
as to Church, as above. Reply. If B. V. not immaculately con-
ceived, why so singularly praised ? Ans. 1) Her loftier sancti-
fication; 2) her virginity first dedicated; 3) mother of all
virgins, because without precept, counsel, example ; 4) fecundity
united with it; 5) transfused to those who sawter; 6) most
adorned with virtues (ff. 187—189).
C. 83. Prom second prerogative, " spouse of God."
Ans. But 1) Church also the bride, yet her members born in
orig. sin ; 2) so also individual virgins ; 3) not true that God
loves less those who have sinned ; nor, 4) that any is called a
sinner from the past, or that saints in heaven are called sinners
(as alleged).
Arg. 1. Unbefitting that spouse of Prince should have been
maidservant and slave of his enemy. But 1) so as to any friend
of Prince or her parents ; 2) one thing what is fitting for us,
another, what befits God to permit. 3) Contrary to Scr., which
speaks of Israel as slave (Isa. 52, &c. ; Jer., Ezek.), and calls
to Him sinful soul, Cant. 6.
Arg. 2. Spouse always loved, could not have been hateful or
hated (this arg. much rested on) ; 1) when in orig. sin, not spouse
or Mother of God ; 2) that does not defile which is without the
will; 3) souls of all righteous, spouses of God (2 Cor. 11);
4) love of God, eternal love, therefore consistent with having
had sin, or what God hates. God, at once " amat quod fecit,
odit quod facimus," "amata est fceda, ne remaneret foeda."
Arg. 3. " Once to have sinned withdraws from perfect love."
Ans. i. e. from his being perfectly lovable ; but this only in
Christ. But not from God's love ; " where sin abounded, grace
work on the Conception of the B. V. 491
super-abounded." Prodigal son restored to perfect love. " We
shall be like unto tlie angels," who never sinned. Nay,
many who have sinned have more love from God than many
angels. God must needs love Christ in His Humanity, more
than all creatures together : therefore fitting that Christ should
have diligibility beyond B. V.
Arg. 4. " Christ loved His mother more than any other son
his, therefore it fitted that He should make her simply worthy
of love of all." Ans. 1) At her Cone, she was not His mother ;
2) fitting that Christ should have a lovableness incommuni-
cable to any creature, never to have had any thing displeasing
to God : the B. V. next, not to have had any thing of her own
will (ff. 189—192).
C. 84. Prerogative 3, "full of grace." Arg. From saying
of S. Jer. * ; " To others grace is given in part ; into Mary the
whole fulness of grace empoured itself;" "into Mary came the
fulness of the whole grace which is in Christ, although other-
wise." Therefore innocence was, being a gift of Divine grace
which was in Christ. Some explain this, as though Christ and
B. V. were equal in grace, and so that she too had not orig. sin.
Ans. This un-Catholic; 1) contrary to Scr., as Ps. 45, "anointed
above Thy fellows — fairer than the children of men ;" "He Who
is from heaven is above all." He is the Word. The Spirit was
"not given by measure to Him." 2) From deterrnin. of Church :
Those condemned, who held that one in this life can be so per-
fected as to become impeccable, and incapable of advancing in
grace. Alvarus, " some pseudo-religious, pretending to be
devout to Mary, said she was as full of grace and the H. Sp. as
C. J., and could not be more perfect in this life, or grow in
grace, or was more perfect in death than in life." Had
S. Jerome thought this, he would not have doubted her as-
sumption, or said the Soul of Christ was Alone free from sin.
" Fulness of grace," in schools, manifold ; 1) sufficient to
salvation — 1 Cor. 1, Eph. 4 ; 2) fulness of comparison — of
Apostles and S. Stephen; 3) fulness in whole Church, no grace
which is not in some one — Eph. 4 ; 4) in mother of God, to
avoid all actual sin ; 5) which makes all sin, orig. and actual,
impossible, and disposes to excellence of union with Divinity —
1 Not S. Jer. ab. p. 444.
492 Analysis of Card, de Turrecremata1 s
in Christ Alone ; or, 6, a) fulness of grace in final cause
union with God, in Christ, union of Person ; 5) in efficient
cause, so as to overflow to all others (as bodily light may, 1)
shine, 2) illumine, 3) make others luminous, 4) be sole source of
light) as in formal cause, perfecting Him, not only as to all
virtues, but all uses of virtue and all effects of grace, and
driving away all sin, actual or original, or power of sin.
Again, "fulness of grace," 1) in itself, i.e. as to essence and
virtue and greatest extension to all effects of grace. This,
Christ's only ; 2) relatively to office in B. V. to be mother of God ;
in Stephen for his office. This is meaning of Jerome, as shown
by context to relate to conception of Jesus. Obj. Sins wounds
of soul ; scar remains, even amid glory. Ans. No scars remain,
except glorious scars of martyrs, or of the Passion (ff. 192 —
195).
C. 85. Fourth title, "Blessed art thou among women," i.e. more
than all ; and so, " whatever curse was infused through Eve, the
blessing of Mary took the whole away." Then she lacked no
virtue which was ever in woman ; therefore not innocence which
Eve had. Ans. In this and other authorities, reference is to the
Incarnation. (This most common error as to authorities alleged
on opposite side, that what is said of her sanctification or her Con-
cept, of the Son of God is referred to her passive conception.)
2) Innocence, in the sense of never having been under sin, a
state, not a virtue. For a) not a mental habit ; b) question in
schools, whether man, in state of innocence, had grace ; (absurd,
if innocence were virtue), c) This innocence not restored
by Death of Christ, but gift of God greater than sin of Adam ;
d) all virtues restored through penitence ; but not this inno-
cence. 3) Eve's innocence has no relation to original sin ;
4) more natural to say that she was born in original righteous-
ness, which is known not to be.
Arg. 2. State of grace excels state of nature ; Adam and
Christ both innocent, therefore Eve and Mary. Ans. Inno-
cence, not virtue. Excellence of gifts presupposes not change
of state; Christ was conceived as Eeconciler, Mary as one to be
reconciled.
Arg. 3. Mary took away curse, not subject to it. Ans. 1)
"She herself took it not away," else Incarn. useless; 2) She
work on the Conception of the B. V. 493
herself was subject to penalties from the curse of Eve to be
removed by her son. Passage of S. Aug. 2, objected, proves the
contrary ; for, since it was her privilege to conceive One Inno-
cent, then Anne, her mother, did not.
Answer to passage of S. Hildefonso (Paschas. Eadb. ab.
pp. 332 — 334). Turr. argues (as above) that the context im-
plies that the immunity from original sin was at her Nativity,
since else irrelevant. The use of " contraxit " he explains as "ex
origine sua traxit," instancing S. Fulgentius' use of trahere"
(ad Petr. c. 27), and S. Aug., that S. Cyprian on his birthday
"pecc. orig. contraxit3,'' and that it is used even of actual sins, as
by S. Ambr. (Hexaem. vi. 24 n. 88) " culpam suarn quam negando
contraxerat," and by S. Aug. de Bapt. Parv. i. n. 63, iii. n. 7, that
infants had as yet contracted no sin of their own life. Passage
of Pasch., so understood by Vine. Hist, and James de Voragine.
Obj. 1. Orig. sin comes from sentence of Divine law; every
one born in orig. sin cursed by God. God, Who gave law against
cursing father and mother, would not curse His own. Ans.
Like declamations might be used as to His mother's mother and
whole kin. Maledixit may be " pronounced evil," but of punish-
ment, not of fault ; for God wills no sin, but that all should be
saved. Malediction, in this sense, fruit of first parents' sin, not
law of God. But under curse as punishment Christ Himself
was subject to it. Also at her conception she was not mother
of God ; and idioms such as " the Lamb slain from the founda-
tion of the world," are to be explained, not extended. Obj. 2.
" Blessed art thou among women," i. e. while they were cursed.
Ans. a) Belated not to time of Cone. ; £>) not so understood by
authorities (if. 193—199).
C. 86. From title, " Most worthy of all praise," but inno-
cence is subject of praise. Ans. 1) Title given her by Church
in regard to Incarn. " Blessed art thou, sacred Virgin Mary,
and worthy of all praise ; because from thee arose the Sun of
Righteousness, Christ our God." 2) Many praises belong to
Christ Alone ; and are not ascribed by Church to B. V. There-
2 " Opus imperiti consarcinatoris." Ben. App. S. Aug. T. v. Serm. 194.
3 " Traxit." Serm. 310 n. 1. ed. Ben., see also Op. Imp. c. Jul. ii. 117,
col. 1000 D. " Quod nascentes trahunt." S. Fulg. de fide ad Petr. n. 17,
ab. p. 132,
494 Analysis of Card, de Turrecr emails
fore this Antiphon cannot mean this. Warning of S. Bonaven-
tura 3 d. 3 and S. Bernard, against false praises of B. V. To
say she was conceived in orig. sin, does not detract from her
honour, as of no other saint; to deny it, derogates from honour
of Christ, and so from hers.
Arg. 2. " Matter of blame to have sinned ; stain of sin in-
consistent with being most 'worthy of all praise.' " Ans. Blame
belongs to things in our own power only.
Arg. 3. Jer. says, " Whatever can be said in human words too
poor for her praise, for she was praised by Grod and angels."
But to have been ever innocent no slight praise. Ans. 1) (as
before). Not all praise, not what belongs to Christ Alone. 2)
He only says we cannot speak adequately of her virtues, as
S. Aug.* says of S. Jer., S. Jer. of Lseta. (ff. 199, 200).
C. 87. From title, " Q.ueen of heaven." Arg. 1. Every excel-
lence of inferiors should exist in the chief. Ans. Not unless she
is chief in all things. But B. V. chief in grace, Angels had
greater natural gifts, as simplicity of substance, &c. Tet not
to have been subject to orig. sin, nature, not grace, in Angels.
Arg. 2. Not fit that the Queen of grace should ever have
been guilty of fault, or Queen of angels handmaiden of
demon, or oppressed by him through sin. Ans. 1) It fol-
lows not, that because a thing would become any, therefore
God should give it. 2) King of grace through inflowing,
cannot have had any fault ;. Mary, Queen of grace, not so, but
by intercession only. But intercession heard from those who
had orig. sin. 3) Terms, such as handmaid of Satan, not to be
used. For in Cone, no knowledge or free-will ; but handmaid,
&c. imply will. False that the soul, contracting orig. sin,
" a diabolo veluti virgo a lenone constupratur." Satan does
not intervene in orig. sin. Such and like language, used to
move minds of the simple, gravely rebuked (ff. 200, 201 v.).
C. 88. From title, " exalted above all choirs of angels."
Highest angels have all which lower have. B. V. then, being
above them, had this, always to have been innocent. Ans. It
would follow, either that no man would be equal to angels,
contrary to our Lord (Luke 20, Matt. 22), or that no man
sinned. Never held in schools, that equality with angels im-
plied equality of original state, but of merits only. Angels in
work on the Conception of the B. V. 495
each order, alike in grace and natural gifts. Man placed in
them, according to conjunction of spirit with God, and chiefly
charity. Freedom from orig. sin, no prerogative in them,
because impossible.
Arg. 1. Michael cast down dragon; unfit that woman, who had
been his slave and handmaid, should be set over them. Ans. (as
before), " who doeth sin, servant of sin ;" but no act in orig.
sin. Arg. 2) "B.V. casts down angels," ,Jer. Ans. Said of
evil women4. Arg. 3) Since Christ at Eight Hand of the
Father, according to His Humanity, has best goods of His
Father, so B. V. at Bight Hand of the Son, has His, and so
innocence. Ans. 1) B. V. not at Eight Hand in her Conception.
2) Because B. Y. is most pure and immaculate, not therefore
in her Cone. 3) Christ does not possess those goods as
Man. Arg. 4) B. V. equal in all things to Christ except in
not being God. Ans. Contrary to faith ; for His Humanity
object of worship, organ of Divinity, temple wherein Godhead
dwells bodily. His love and Passion price of our redemption.
Arg. 5) S. Anselm, " Above thee, the B. V., is God alone ; all
which is not God, is below thee " (the B. V.). By God, he
means Christ in both instances ; else Humanity of Christ
below B. Y. Arg. 6) S. Bern., " B. V. immersed in light in-
approachable, as far as condition of creature allows without
personal union." Ans. This expressly sets her below the
Humanity,Which was personally united. Arg. 7) Aug., " 'What
could be more holy than her in human seed ? ' But Christ
born of human seed, since of the most pure blood of the B. V."
Ans. Contrary held by all who believe virgin-birth. Arg. 8)
Anselm, " "Who surpasseth angels in purity ;" but one once in
sin may surpass in virtue, not in purity. Aus. Not true. Prov.
" Take away rust, and a most pure vessel shall go forth." Where
is greater grace, there greater purity. Ps. 51, " I shall be whiter
than snow ;" 1 Tim. 1, " Love out of pure hearts ;" Acts 15,
" Faith (i. e. " informed " by love) purifying heart." But those
who have been sinners often have greater love. 2) Purity of
angels not freedom from orig. sin, which they could npt have,
as neither could animals, but from actual, and this was in
B. V. Last Arg. " Christ, being Almighty, gave His mother
4 Before the Flood.
496 Analysis of Card, de Turrecremata s
all befitting her, therefore never to have been hated by her
Son." 1) As before, in her own Cone, not mother of God.
2) To have sin by will, would have been unbefitting her future
prerogative ; not to have had orig. sin, esp. pro parvula morula.
3) To have had what is hateful, does not make her to have been
hateful. " Thou hatest nothing which Thou hast made," &c. as
before.
Inferences from the whole— 1) It belonged to Christ Alone,
the Universal Eedeemer, Mediator of God and men, to have
contracted in His Conception nothing displeasing to the eyes
of His Father, to expiate which, a Sacrifice was necessary.
2) It became not that this should be communicated to another,
which would be inseparably derogatory from glory and dignity
of Christ. 8) Conception in orig. sin noways derogates from
prerogatives of B. V., any more than to be cleansed by His
Blood, and reconciled to the Eternal Father (ff. 201 v.— 205).
PAET X.
Answers to authorities and grounds alleged to prove that God
ought to preserve J3. V. from orig. sin ; and first, answers
to statements as to literal sense of Holy Scripture.
C. 89. Arg. 1. That is the literal sense of H. Scr. which the
Holy Ghost intended, and which we have been told iuerrantly to
be its meaning. 2) H. Scr., alleged by Church to prove any thing,
means what it is alleged for. 3) Lessons read on F. of Cone.,
prove that, according to its literal meaning, H. Scr. proved the
Imm. Cone. Ans. Exception to word "ought;" God owes
nothing except by promise. Their definition of literal sense
of H. Scr. contrary to the H. Scr. itself, which distinguishes
what the letter means, and what the things signified by letter
mean, viz. spiritual meaning. Gal. 4 recognizes this. Evi-
dent, too, from fact. In many lessons, H. Scr. is used in
applied sense, as on sanctif. of Jeremiah and S. John B.
Church believed that John B. was so sanctified, and thence used
lessons. In Holy Scr., too, truths are illustrated not proved
by mystical senses, as "I will be to him a Father," of Christ.
"A bone of him shall not be broken," because paschal lamb
work on the Conception of the B. V. 497
type of Christ, therefore ordered that its bones be not broken.
But spiritual meaning not proof, because grounded on likeness
only ; but likeness may be partial. Literal sense may be in plain
terms or metaphor, and same metaphor used of God and man,
as light, day. The same might apply in different degrees, or
might belong to different times (ff. 205—209).
Auth. 1. Gen. 3. Arg. Others have conquered Satan, but
have not bruised his head ; some most singular privilege of B. V.
Ans. 1) Not explained of B. V. as literal meaning ; bruising his
head, resisting the beginning of temptation (Greg. M., Isidore,
de Lyra, &c.), so it belongs to all saints ; 2) interpreted of the
Church (Gloss). 3) If of B. V., not of the time when she had
no use of free-will. The sanctified in womb and baptized
children are freed from power of devil, do not bruise his head,
because there is no co-operation of theirs. 4) Expos, of saints
say that it was in her actual graces (Eup. Bern., Isid., &c.).
Others, that she bruised his head, because He Who should bruise
it was to be born of her. So S. Bern., where alleged to the
contrary, " all heretical pravity trampled by her," because all
against Incarnation, as, that Christ not of her substance, or
that she did not bear but found her Son (nou peperisse sed
reperisse), or title Theotokos denied. So S. Bern. (ff. 209,
210).
Auth. 2. Ark of shittim wood. Arg. B. V. incorruptible
wood. Therefore she was not born in corruption of orig. sin.
Ans. Not interpreted of B. V. exclusively, but 1) of flesh of
Christ ; 2) of the Church ; 3) if of B. V., of sanctification after
Cone, (as Alb. M.) . If argument might be taken from accident
of the wood, then contrary might be argued from comparison
to things corruptible, as vine, tabernacle, ship. Auth. 3. "A
star shall arise," Num. 24; but star brightness; therefore no
spot of orig. sin. Ans. Star of wise men. If applied to B. Y.,
argument would have fallacy of equivocation, as in almost all the
authorities. If argument held as to B. Y., so to all called stars,
&c. But Job 3, stars darkened ; Job. 23, stars not clean in His
sight. "Arising," too, would belong to Nativity, not to Con-
ception. Auth. 4. Esth. 15, " This was not made for thee but
for all" applied to orig. sin. Ans. Does not in letter belong
to B. Y. ; would belong to her as Bride, not to Cone. ; exception
I i
498 Analysis of Card, de Turrecremattfs
as to Esther derogated not from king, as would that of B. V.
Auth. 5. Ps. 19, "Day to day uttereth speech." S. Bern.
" Angel announces Incarn. to B.V." If B. V. the day, then her
dawn full of light. Aus. Arg. would apply to all saints, " sons of
light and of the day." S. Bern, says, she is day propter inte-
gritatis virtutem. If it applied at all, sanctification which fol-
lowed on Cone. Auth. 6. " He placed his tabernacle in the sun;"
so Cone, not in darkness of orig. sin. Ans. Sun, interpreted of
Church, would involve Imm. Cone, of many more. Auth. 7.
Ps. 45, " The King shall desire thy beauty." Therefore no pre-
ceding spot. Ans. Expounded of Church, which was not clean,
but cleansed. Auth. 8. " The Most High hath sanctified His
tabernacle." Her sanctif. greater than others ; but not earlier
than Jeremiah's, c. 1, or Isaiah's, c. 49 ; therefore freedom from
orig. sin. Ans. Literal sense, material tabernacle. Lyra. "The
Church or the Body which the Son of God took."* Even if of
the B. Y., does not prove as to Conception. For four preroga-
tives of sanctification of B. V., 1) Prior in time. For " before
I formed thee in the womb, I knew thee " of Jeremiah, is his
eternal predestination. Isaiah in c. 49 is speaking not of him-
self, as alleged, but of Christ ; would not have been adduced, if
weighed with its Glosses ; 2) in perfection of grace, making not
Nativ. alone, but whole life blameless ; 3) more confirmed in
good, as more united with Christ her Son ; 4) extinguished all
passion in beholders. Auth. 9. Ps. 87. " He was born in her ;
the Most High Himself founded her." Ans. 1) Eelates to the
Church ; 2) as to the B. V., explained by de Lyra, as to mortal
and venial sin ; strange that neither Gloss nor de Lyra thought
of orig. sin, had it been meant. Auth. 10. " Holiness becometh
Thy house for ever." Ans. De Lyra, of the Church. Else as
in 8.
Auth. 11. "Whole 8th ch. of Prov. under different heads,
chapter being sung in some Churches on F. of Nat. and Cone,
of B. V. Arg. Intelligent agent regards end more than means
to end ; and of means, those which are nearest to end. God then
accounts of B. Y. more than all inanimate creation. Incarnation,
i. e. the Man Christ, was the first obje'ct of God. Redemp-
tion not primary object of Inc. ; for the greater, Christ, not re-
ferred to the less, man. B. Y., belonging substantially to Inc.,
work on the Conception of the B. V. 499
intended by God prior to first parents and decree of Divine
curse in contraction of orig. sin. Conception then of B. Y.
" before abyss " is, she was conceived without darkness of igno-
rance and sin. Ans. 1. Prov. 8 literally can be explained only of
Christ ; in part, only of His Godhead (so Gloss. Nic. de Lyra),
same as John i. 1 ; denotes eternal co-existence, personal dis-
tinction from the Father, personal being. Obj. 1. God, not Lord
of the Son. Ans. "Lord" used as in Ps. 2. Obj. 2. " Possessed,"
of inferior. Ans. God called " possession" of Israel. " Order "
in Divine Nature, of mode of being, not of time or perfection.
Ans. 2. Prov. 8, in office of one virgin (" as is known to all
the fathers, who have the ordinary of the orisons "), yet against
faith, so to interpret it. Obj. But great difference between B.Y.
and other virgins. Ans. Difference as to mystical interpreta-
tion, not so as to make it literal. . "Words declaring eternal
generation of the Word, not to be used of human generation.
B.Y. not "before every work of mercy," else she would have
no share in the redemption, work of Divine mercy. Tit. 3, and
in Magnificat. All which is read in lesson does not belong to any
virgin, but Prov. 8. 32 — 35 apply to all virgins, specially B. Y.
Ans. 3. To say that redemption not chief end of Incarn.
against Creed, "Who for us men," &c., and Scr., Matt. 18,
The Son of man came to seek, &c. ; John 3, God so loved, &c.
Gal. 4, God sent His Son, to redeem, &c. ; Heb. 2, Took man,
through death to destroy, &c. ; S. Matt. 1, For He shall save,
&c.
Ans. 4. Against reason, too. 1) If redemption not chief end
of Inc., then chief end not named in Scr. Eeply, What is most
needed for fallen man is named more frequently. Ans. Chief
end, according to them, not named at all. Injurious too to
devotion.
Ans. 5. 1) Since Inc. is for creation any how, inconsistent to
urge that greater is not for the less : comparison is not between
God and creature, but between two works of God. Expos,
that by " abyss " is meant " sin," not supported.
Auth. 12. Prov. 9, "Wisdom built her a house." Arg.
Not on a decayed foundation. Ans. To be explained literally
of Christ and Church. But members of Church born in orig.
sin.
i i 2
500 Analysis of Card, de Turrecremata? s
Auth. 13. Prov. ult., " her lamp shall not be put out in dark-
ness." Arg. of orig. sin. Ans. 1) Explained of Christ and
every perfect soul. 2) Cannot be understood of orig. sin, for,
at infusion of soul, no light to be extinguished.
Auth. 15. Cant. 2, "As lily among thorns," explained of
actual purity and chastity. Eighteous compared in Scr. to lilies.
Auth. 16. " { Thou art all fair, my love, and there is no spot in
thee,' being said absolutely, belongs to all her being, and so to
Cone." Ans. Literal sense not of B. V., much besides does not
belong to her. Cant, not prophetic book. No Comm. explains it
as prophecy of her (he had looked to Gloss. Greg., Bern., Will,
of Paris, Alan., J£gid. E., John de Yarsiaco, Lyra), nor ancient
doctor. Theol. say, " Her sanctif. in womb to be believed,
though no Scr. proof." This could not have been said, had this
been so understood. Properly explained of Church ; but each
member had orig. sin ; all had had some spot of sin. Obj. To
say that Church of God had been once foeda, against Christian
religion. Ans. (as before) Limitations of time often necessary
to explain Scr. Dignities of B. V., not all of one time. Eph. i.
"God chose us to be blameless." Not of whole life. Euin of
Jews from explaining prophecies of later time, as to the begin-
ning. Circumcision not observed, though not limited as to
time. Hymn in office of Confessors calls each " pius, prudens,
humilis, &c. ;" all (as S. Aug.) were not always such. Solomon
could not contradict. David, who foretold separation of Christ
from others, and Solomon himself, Eccl. 7 (as ab.), " Wholly
pure and always pure," different ; the 2nd belongs to Christ
only. Explained by S. Thomas of absence of actual sin.
Auth. 17. Cant., " One is my dove." Ans. Lit. of Church.
Auth. 18. " Who is this like rising dawn ?" Ans. Explained of
Church. As to B. V., related to her birth (ortus). Not neces-
sary that metaphor should be verified in every thing. " Typus
in parte est, non in toto ;" dawn, too, imperfect light ; so would
prove contrary.
Auth. 19. " Wisdom will not dwell in body subject to sin."
No proof that it relates to first instant of her Cone.
Auth. 20—25. Wisd. 7, Eccl. 24, relate to Uncreated
Wisdom.
Auth. 26. " From the beginning was I created." Ans. Pre-
work on the Conception of the B. V. 501
destination of Incarnation. But if mystically of B. V., enough
that she was, a) manifoldly foretold under various figures, b)
speedily sanctified, c) Deipara.
Auth. 27. "Ministered in a holy habitation." Ans. 1) Literally
Christ ; 2) She did not minister at her Cone.
Auth. 28. "I was exalted like cedar." Expl. Of members of
Christ, who had orig. sin.
Auth. 29. " I was exalted like palm tree." Ans. The like.
Auth. 30 — 34. Comparisons to olive, cinnamon, myrrh, rose-
tree, Ps. 128 ; (like answers) some chiefly of Christ, but also of
Church.
Auth. 35. " In Me is all grace of virtue and truth." Ans.
Of Uncreated Wisdom.
Auth. 36. "I was as a vine." Ans. Of Incarn.
Auth. 37. Ecclus. 24. 41. "Words too great for conception of
nature, relate to Birth of Christ, Who brought us medicine of
salvation.
Auth. 38. Isa. 11. " A rod shall come forth from root of
Jesse." Ans. Relates from force of terms to Nativity, in which
office it is used. No such sermon of S. Ambrose as alleged
(de Gabaonitis), with words " in qua nee nodus origi. nee cortex
venialis culpaB fuit," nor quoted by S. Aug. as alleged.
Auth. 39. Angelic salutation, Ave, full of grace, &c. Ave,
" absence of woe." Ans. If urged, would belong to women
after Eesurr. (except of child-birth), "avete." Matt, 28. If
vae of posna, not removed ; if of fault, removed at this time.
Whole argument faulty, because said at time of overshadowing
of the Holy Ghost. Obj. " Gratia plena, benedicta es," as
before.
Auth. 40. " My spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour ; all
generations shall call me blessed." Arg. If Cone, in orig. sin,
not blessed, but miserable. Ans. Blessing belongs to her adult
life ("For He hath beheld," &c.), and to the Incarnation.
Grounds alleged from command to honour parents. Arg. 1)
as before. Ans. At her Conception, she was not His mother.
This began with His Birth, " born of a woman, born under the
law." Son bound to honour her, not absolutely with every
thing, but with what fitted. Not fitting that natural Cone,
should be like supernatural (S. Ans. de cone. virg. c. 12), &c.
502 Analysis of Card, de Turrecremata's
Arg. 2) bound to preserve her from wrath of God. Ans. B. V.
was preserved from doing any thing personally, which should be
hindrance of Divine love. Orig. sin did not prevent her being
the object of God's love. Arg. 3) If Assumption reasonable on
this ground, then Imm. Cone. Ans. In Assumption, she was
His mother ; nor did it derogate from His own honour. Arg. 4)
Orig. sin a debt which ought to be remitted to a mother. Ans.
as bef. Strange to call orig. sin either debt or deadly sin.
Arg. 5) " ' The Lord willed not the faith as to His birth to rest
on injuries to His mother.' S. Amb. Therefore He willed to
pass by what belongs to faith in Him and His glory, to pre-
serve honour of His mother." Ans. S. Amb. meant only, Christ
preferred to be thought conceived in marriage, than through
sin, which Jews would think. Inference unadvised ; against our
Lord's precept, S. Matt, x., "He that loveth," &c., and
practice; S. Luke ii. 49. Arg. 6) Matt. xi. " Among those born
of woman arose not greater than John B." B. Y. greater
than John B. ; so she arose not from orig. sin. Ans. Said of
men ; not so statement of universality of original sin (ff. 205 —
230 v.).
PABT XL
Answers to arguments from resurrection and Assumption of
2.V.
C. 90. Arg. In S. Aug.'s time, Assumption of B. V. 1) as much
matter of doubt, and 2) as difficult to reconcile with H. Scr. as
Imin. Cone. now. Ans. to 1 : a) doubted, as by S. Jer. (ab. p. 444),
and S. Bern, on Ass., not denied; H) some believe that those
who rose (S. Matt. 27) ascended with Christ, but all confessed
that Christ alone was conceived without sin. Aus. to 2 : Error
to take all universal propositions of H. Scr. universally, or to
limit all. Prop, as to resurr. limited by S. Matt. 27. No
exception to be made to "All things were made by Him ;" so
neither to His being universal Eedeemer ; both derogate from
Him. Prop, as to orig. sin not simply universal, but one
exception, and one only, made — Christ Himself; so disallowing
all other exceptions (" great festival made " of this arg.). Arg.
in Aug. (Anon.) rested on the points, which, at time of her own
work on the Conception of the B. V. 503
Concep., were not — oneness of her flesh with that of Christ,
her maternity, indwelling of Divinity (whence called, throne of
God, chamber of Most High, tabernacle of Christ), — integrity
in Cone, and birth of Christ. Arg. The same on both sides. To
have been under orig. sin did not make B. V. habitation of
the daemon (as alleged, and Satan does not inhabit souls)
or captive of hell, or slave of daemons, handmaid of the devil
(slavery not, where there is no will). Obj. Mohammed more
considerate of purity of B. V., from Coran : " l Mary, God chose
thee and purified and chose thee illustrious above women of
world." Ans. " Purified " implies something to purify.
Tradition, he " heard the messenger of God (Moh.) saying ' none
of the sons of Adam is born whom Satan touches not when he
is born, and who does not weep at his touch, save Mary and
her Son.' " Ans. 1) Moh. could not refer to orig. sin, not be-
lieving it ; 2) said of birth, when children weep, not of Cone. ;
3) contradicts hymn, the Church and Wisd. 7 explained of
Christ. Ibn Musa, " Moh. said, many men perfect, no woman
save mother of Jesus." Ans. If said of her life, the belief of
all ; if of her Cone., contradicts Eccl. 7. Other argts. repetition
(ff. 230v.-241).
- C. 91. Ans. to argts., from her being Mother of God, from
comparison of original and venial sin, and from material temples.
Arg., Wherever she is mentioned, some prerogative above
common implied. Ans. 1) would prove nothing as to her
Cone. ; 2) fact denied. Instances, Luke 2, " The sword shall
pierce." " Thy father and I have sought Thee ;" John 2, "What
have I to do with thee ?" &c. ; John 19, "Woman, behold thy
son" all explained by Gloss and fathers. Arg. 1. "Some say,
Jesus made John her son by nature, without previous genera-
tion." Ans. Much would follow, contrary to faith — a) One
besides Christ had a natural virgin-mother ; b) with no father on
earth ; c) that John was our Lord's natural brother ; d) that
B. V. had son by nature, not of her substance, not God, a
sinner. Confusion of natural and adopted son contrary to
1 Sura iii. 42. They also quoted 45—47, which De Turr. sets aside, as
obviously irrelevant. All the citations are together in Martini Pugio Fidei,
f. 587, taken from his MS. by Galatinus, L. 7, c. 5. See also in Maracci,
Refutat. Alcor. iii. 36, p. 112.
504 Analysis of Card, de Turrecrematd 's
nature. Arg. 2. "If B. V. exempt from venial sin, therefore
from orig. sin, as being worse." Ans. Not so; for original sin
has no sin of will. " Venial sin is sin of person, proceeding
from some disordering of the actual own will of him who sins
venially." " Original sin is sin of nature, proceeding from
disordering of nature, and is contracted without any act of will
of the being conceived." Exaggeration of saying that orig. sin
made the being conceived, a traitor (proditor). Not true that
" little one conceived in orig. sin, has even more inclination to
commit sin of unfaithfulness to God than Adam." Ans. Con-
cupiscence in child, habitual; in Adam actual. Disposition to
act makes not one guilty of it ; else any might be guilty of
any thing. Obj. If universal statements taken without limita-
tion, her exemption from actual sin as repugnant to Scr. as
from original. Ans. 1) Exceptions of birth of Jerem. and John
B. in H. Scr. Nothing repugnant to it. Authorities say she
was privileged as to actual, not as to orig. sin. 2) Proof as to
such universal declaration of universality of actual sin fails.
Job 15, " Born of a wom,an," orig. sin ; Job 25, " No one is clean,
not an infant a day old." The same. Such could not have actual
sin. Prov. 20, " Who can say, I have a clean heart?" forbids
boasting. Isa. 53," All we, like sheep, have gone astray," includes
children. So Ps. 21, " They have all gone out of the way."
Ps. 116, " I said in my heart, All men are liars." Eom. 3, " All
come short of the glory of God," in themselves or Adam.
Authorities from S. Aug. 3) S. Aug. did except B. V. from
actual sins.
Arg. 3. The vessels of temple of purest gold; much more
should B. V., figured by them, never have been made of fetid
flesh, sprinkled with defilement of abominable sin. Ans. 1)
Allegorical exposition proves nothing ; 2) vessels, chiefly typical
of Christ — Isidore, &c. ; 3) also typical of faithful, would prove
they had no orig. sin ; 4) would imply that B. V. not formed of
common substance of man, whence (opponents say) " soul is
made more abominable to God and angels than temple full of
horrid dung;" 5) if B. Y. were typified, not proved that it
related to her animation (other usual argts.) ; 6) Gloss on
Cant. 1 ; Murenulas, &c. Ans. 1) No such Gloss ; 2) would
prove nothing as to Cone. (ff. 241 v. — 247).
work on the Conception of the B. V. 505
PAET XII.
C. 92. Answer to reasons and authorities that B.V. was
by prevenient grace of sanctification preserved from original
sin.
First, four propositions stated as belonging to both doctrines
and these rejected. 1) That some excellences of accidental glory
or dignity, corresponding to works of mercy, found in saints, are
not in B. V. Ans. Highest order of heavenly hierarchy have all
of lower. 2) That to Christ Himself, the Beatitude and Eeward
of the saints, from Whom emanates whatever bliss or ex-
cellence of essential or accidental glory the saints have, some
prerogative and excellence of dignity of glory, accidental or
relative, is wanting. 3) That in all true excellence of glory
Christ and the B. V. are equal. Ans. " Against Holy Scripture
and all reason, are not of the mind of those doctors alleged on
the opposite side, as shown above." 4) That the B. V. is be-
lieved to have been sanctified in her mother's womb, " as soon
as the grace of sanctification could exist in her," corrected, "as
soon as was fitting."
Four modes of preservation. 1) " Cleansing of infection, viz.
that the semina of the parents, of which the virgin body was
formed, should be purified before infusion of rational soul into
the clean, not unclean, flesh, so that it should not contract orig.
sin ;" mentioned in Bonav. 2 d. 34, q. 4. Ans. Rejected by school-
men and only mentioned by S. Bonav. 2) " By the removal or
suspension of the causality, that Grod should remove from that
semen, or suspend, the force causative of sin, because it was con-
ceived ' libidinose,' as in miracles of S. John Ev. drinking poison,
or preserving the three children from fire." Ans. Pet. Lomb.
(2 dist. 31) does infer from Ambr. and Aug., that the soul con-
tracts orig. sin from union with flesh, yet not by flesh acting
on spirit. 3) That by a special privilege God sanctified Anne
and Joachim, not only personally, but as to the power of
nature, that they might generare absque libidine et conse-
quenter sine peccato. Ans. This privilege reserved to B. V.
"Blessed is the Fruit of thy womb :" so Comm. 4) That she was
preserved by grace of dispensation, privilege, or sanctification to
child, not to parents, so that it should be graciously granted to
506 Analysis of Card, de Turrecremata's
B. V. at first instant of her conception, that she should not be
bound to the law or effect of the law of contraction of orig. sin.
Grounds, 1) her greater purity, that she never was subject to
uncleanness, as of greater wisdom, in which was never ignorance.
Ans. Contrary to Ps. 51, " Thou shalt purge me," and Prov. 25.
" Take away the rust, and most pure vessel," &c. Previous
cleansing diminishes not actual purity, nor former ignorance
actual knowledge. 2) " Since B. Y. has singular magnificence
above all pure creatures, fitting that she should have singular
mode of sanctification, and not the homely one, that infants and
flagitious be reconciled after enmity, and so said to be sancti-
fied, because purified from sin." a) Sanctif. of B, V. was above
all in greatness, earliness, firmness ; b) not like that of those
purified from actual sin, for from orig. sin only ; c) yet dignity
short of that of Christ, and so her Conception. 3) This mode of
sanctif. found in saints and friends of God, and Christ said to be
sanctified, Who was yet never under sin. Ans. a) in fact before
[here meaning seemingly mistaken]. 4) All grant that B. V.
was sanctified as soon as possible, then it might have been before
orig. sin. Ans. Only as soon as fitted. Henry of Ghent (as
ab. p. 235) (ff. 247 v.— 250).
Alleged authorities for preservation of B. V. from orig. sin, —
1) Acts of S. Andrew (ab. pp. 297, 298). Ans. Many called
" immaculate" who yet were born in orig. sin (as Ps. xxxvii. and
cxix. 1, and [not] S. Ambr. serm. 2 on S. Agnes.) 2) In [not]
S. Ambr. serm. de Gabaoii. (as ab.). 3) Id. on S. Luke "Maluit
Dom. de suo orfcu quam de matris pudore dubitari" (see
ab. p. 502). 4 — 9) from S. Jerome (forgery, ab. p. 444), de Ass.
Virg. beg. " Cogitis me, Paula et Eust." (answered ab.). 10)
S. Aug. de 5 hreres. (see ab. pp. 312, 313), "Stulte, unde sordes,"
relates to virginity. 11) Ib. " If I could be defiled" (quoted by
opponent, " si potuit inquinari mater mea cum ipsam facerem,"
for " si potui inquinari," gravely censured by T. 12) S. Aug.
[not his] serm. on the Assumption (ans. as ab.). 13) S. Aug. de
Nat. et Grat., exception as to B. V. Ans. 1) Context, both
before and after, includes B. V. in orig. sin ; before, in citing
H. Scr. " All have sinned and lack," &c., else no need to
become Christians. "They that are sick," &c. ; all flesh
except Christ's, " flesh of sin;" afterwards, "the offence
work on the Conception of the B. V. 507
passed to all men," &c. ; 2) Aug. excepts only actual sins, for
this what heretics objected, and what S. John, whom he
cited, alleged ; 3) saints would not have to confess that they had
orig. sin, it having been washed in Bapt. ; 4) borne out by
S. Aug. de Perf. Just. c, ult. ; 5) to confer grace to conquer sin,
must relate to actual sin; "conquer" a personal act; 6) Aug.
denies of B. Y. what he affirms of the righteous, but this is actual
sin. "All the more famous doctors, Mast, of Sent., Alex, de
Ales, Albert., S. Thorn., Bonav., and others named above, are of
the same mind as to S. Aug.'s meaning. 14) Aug., some serm.
on the B. V. (misquoted) . " As soon as she came into the world
by the line of human generation ;" a) " came into world " is of
nativity ; J) not of infus. of soul, for that is creation of God ; nor,
c) of concept, of seeds, &c. 15) In same serm. " A maiden born
of stock of Adam, of sinful stock, instead of curse of Eve, is pro-
nounced blessed above all women." Ans. Eefers not to her own
Cone., but to that of Christ. Else, " born of sinful stock," and
change from curse to blessing would imply orig. sin. 16) S. Maxi-
mus (misquoted) relates to Nativity from a) word "prodiit;"
b) contrasts of" fons rudis humani generis," " radix vitiata," and
" virga prodiit," c) read on Nativ. of B. V. 17) " As thorn the
rose, Judaea Mary bare," hymn, "genuit," of actual birth, as in
Ant. " To-day she bare (genuit) the Saviour," &c. ; generatio used
of Nativity of Jesus. S. Aug. Our Saviour (natus) born of the
Father. 18) " Purity, than which none can be conceived greater
under God" (see ab. p. 166). Ans. a) Said of the Cone, of
Christ, not of her own. This shown from context. 1) S. Ans.
would not contradict what he has just said. But, c. 12 — 18, he
had ascribed Imm. Cone, of Christ to His Virgin birth ; c. 19,
he had said she was cleansed. Also, Cur Deus Homo. Not dis-
ciple'swordsonly,for not to correct is to connive. So interpreted
by Alex, de Ales., Albert., S. Thomas, Bonav., and almost whole
school. 19) S. Ans. De Concept. Virg. Ans. a) Not his, and
contradicts him ; I) style, idioms, different ; c) book not named
by old Theol. or Vincent. Hist. ; d) falsehood, that E. of Cone,
was kept in S. Ans. time, e) Eng. Theol. said, book not held in
Eng. to be his, had many suspected doctrines, esp. contradicted
Cur Deus Homo. 20) Erom same ; same ans. ; also in suae cone,
primordio may mean " soon after," as John 8 : " The devil was a
508 Analysis of Card, de Turrecremata? s
murderer from the beg.," i. e. soon after existence ; 21) his Ep.
to Eng. Bps. : " I hold him not true lover of B. V., who refuses
to celebrate F. of her Cone." Ans. 1) If his (ab. p. 206),
he may have kept Fest. as of her sanctif. 2) F. is on day of
Cone, of seeds, not of animation. 22) S. Cyril Alex., that, in
answer to Nestorius saying, " In the time of grace, the curse
of fault was not wanting," he is said to have said, " After the
Sou, it is rash to put on Mary stain or sin. Ans. 1) T. had
read through Acts, Decrees of C. of Eph. and S. Cyril's Epp. to
Nest. No such passage there ; 2) would relate to actual sin ;
orig. sin is implied in S. Cyr. Ep. to Nestor., " Whoso says
that Christ offered Himself as oblation for Himself too, and not
for us only, since He needed no oblation for Himself, "Who knew
no sin, let him be anathema." Then all, for whom that oblation
was offered, had sin. 23) S. Bern, on Nat. of S. John B. (ab.
pp. 168—170), "that B. V. was cleansed by a higher kind of
sanctif. ;" but earlier sanct. was not higher kind. Ans. On the
contr., he says "she was cleansed" and, lower down, "was
washed " (mundata, abluta) ; says of B. V., S. John, and Jerem.,
" they were conceived of sin ; He of the Spirit and in the Holy
Spirit." 24) Id. Serm. on Nat. (not of Assump., as they said).
" The flesh of the V., taken from Adam, admitted not spots of
Adam." Ans. Context and word " admisit " (not " contraxit ")
shows he meant actual sin. 25) Id. Serm. on Nat. " Foecunda3
Nat.," &c. "Pure humanity in Mary is not only pure from all
contagion, but pure by singularity of nature." Ans. From con-
text before and after, of her adult graces. 26) Horn. Yig. Nat.
" alone blessed among women, alone free from the general
curse, and alien from the pang of mothers." Also in Serm. on
Adv. Ans. Eelate to her child-bearing. 27) Ib. "To me a
brightness flashes, first in the generation of Mary," &c. Ans.
In context her descent of David ; " singular privilege of sanc-
tity," i. q. "more copious benediction of sanctif.," elsewhere,
throughout life, " singular! privilegio," context, of her virgin
Cone. ; " she alone did not conceive in sin," then her mother did.
Obj. " These, then, were great miracles." Ans. S. Bern, says
" prefigured by miracles." Tet cone, of barren parents
miraculous, as Bern, says of John B. and of B. V. ; miracle,
nasci (not concipi) sine peccato. 28) Eich. a S. Viet. (ab.
work on the Conception of the B. V. 509
pp. 508 sqq.), " It fitted not that flesh of Mary be subject to any
fault." Ans. If correct, of actual sin and of virgin Cone. ; from
context "pravitas" used of actual sin, not of evil, " maluin."
29) S. Thomas, a) " purity removal from contrary ; so may be
creature, than which nothing can be found purer in creation ;
such purity of Mary, who was free (immunis) from original and
actual sin." Ans, Better not have quoted S. Thomas, whose
doctrine is so clear in so many places ; he only spoke of actual
immunity, not past. Doubtful passages to be explained by
clear. Greg. No notice of any contradiction in his Concordantia
Dictorum ; her depuration from all sin, whereby she attained
highest purity under God, implies orig. sin. Z>) Id. in expos,
salut. Ang. " She was most pure as to fault, because she
incurred neither original, nor mortal, nor venial sin." Ans. 1)
After examining many originals, the words "nee originale"
not found. 2) S. Th. had just said contrary; " Christ excelled
the B. V. in this, that He was conceived and born without orig.
sin, the B. Y. was conceived in orig. sin,not born." c) Ib. " she
was free from all curse (on Adam and Eve) pain in childbirth,
labour of brow, returning to dust ;" therefore, according to
S. Th., from orig. sin. Ans. Arg. not S. Th.'s, for he asserted
the contrary.
Summary. — T. had passed over much said on the other side,
chiefly as to meanings given to Scr. and h. doctors, and pro-
positions so elicited, as — 1) not only new, but often opposed
to the old ; 2) not founded on Scr. or authentic doctors ; 3) for
conciseness, yet ready to answer to Synod any thing omitted.
1) Authorities of Scr., rightly understood, as understood by
Saints and the most approved doctors, have no force to prove
preservation of B. V. by prevenient grace of sanctification.
2) Passages of H. Scr. alleged, rightly understood, as by the
Saints and most received doctors, support not doctrine of
Imm. Cone. ; 3) nor authorities of holy doctors inspected fully,
not lopped, as experience shows ; 4) nor inferences from H.
Scr., sayings of doctors, offices of Church. 5) There being
then no authentic ground from Scr., or sayings of authentic
doctors, or evidence of reason gathered from foundations of
faith, it is truer, sounder, safer (in S. Bonav.'s words), as
being supported by Scr., according to Gloss, and express say-
510 Analysis of Card, de Turrecremata's
ings of Saints, and irrefragably taught by nearly the whole
school of famous doctors of law, human and Divine, that Christ
Alone was free from orig. sin (if. 250 — 261).
PAET XIII.
The fifteen propositions of opponents, and where refuted.
C. 93. 1) " That the Bl. Deipara did not contract orig. sin,
but, being endowed by God her Son with singular privilege, and
prevented by gifts of grace, was preserved therefrom," through-
out. 2) " That she might still be said to have contracted orig.
sin," specially answered in c. 8 ; 3) " that she might still be said
to have been redeemed by Christ more than others " (refuted
most plainly in c. 21) ; 4, 5) and is truly believed to have been
cleansed (purgata) and sanctified (refuted in c. 18) ; and
6) was subjected to many penalties, which came from that first
sin, yet not voluntarily, but by necessity of nature (refuted
most clearly in c. 20) ; and 7) that her conception fell short of
the privilege of Christ (refuted, as regards immunity from sin,
c. 22) ; and 8) that she could be said to have been tithed
in Abraham (refuted, c. 19) ; and 9) ": that unless she was so
preserved from orig. sin, Christ would not have been the most
perfect Mediator (refuted, c. 22) ; 10) that if the B. V. had
contracted orig. sin, and only remained an imperceptible time,
or a single instant, in it, it had been worse for her than to have
been damned eternally, with the pcena damni or pcena sensus
(refuted in principle in c. 2, on orig. sin) ; 11) further grounds.
The B. V. must have chosen rather to lose the Divine vision
(which is worse than the pains of sense) than to be for one
instant in one mortal sin. Ans. a) No " pain of loss " to infant
dying in orig. sin, since not made for Divine vision, nor could
have gained it. b) Better not to have been born, than to be in
mortal sin ; not so, than to die in orig. sin ; orig. sin is not mortal
sin, and could not fall under choice. Proposition alien from
common doctrine of Theol. or judgment of human reason.
Prop. 12) Had B. V. contracted orig. sin, she would not have
attained her ultimate innocence (confuted c. 26) ; or 13) to
work on the Conception of the B. V. 511
the highest possible grace (confuted c. 29) ; 14) that to assert
her preservation from it, is not contrary to Scr. (contrary shown
in many chapters, especially c. 11), or to the holy doctors,
(contrary shown in c. 12) (ff. 261 v.— 262 v.).
C. 94. Answer as to scholastic doctors alleged by first
Magister proponent.
1) S. Dominic said to have said, " Christ was formed of
virgin and immaculate earth." Ans. Treatise not known ; if his,
answer same as to S. Andrew. To be conceived in orig. sin does
not derogate from integrity or purity of B. Y. 2) S. Thomas
Aq. (answered above, cc. 12 and 29). Statement of John
Vitalis, that S. Thorn, wrote to retract, omitted honestatis
causa. 3) Rob. Holcot, treatise, that doctrine of S. Anselm
not to be condemned. Ans. S. Anselm held cone, in orig. sin
(ab. c. 12), so did Holcot (ab. c. 11) ; 4) Vincentius His-
torialis. Ans., says nothing of his own. Passage of S. Ildef.
cited, does not prove it. 5) Master of Sent. Ans. Contrary
proved from other places and that cited. 6) Alex, de Ales said
to have contradicted in last illness what he had said. Ans.
No proof of this, contrary doctrine in c. 14. 7) Ric. Middleton,
said in his old age to have written on Ave Maria, that the B. V.
was not conceived in orig. sin. Ans. Not proved, and, in face
of opposite teaching, not to be believed till proved. 8) Scotus,
in 3 d. 3. Ans. Spoke doubtfully there. 9) Nic. de Lyra, in
answer to Jew. Ans. His doctrine very clear (see c. 14) ; does
not say in tract, that B. V. did not contract orig. sin (ab. c. 28).
10) Armachanus retracted what he said, 3 d. 3, in sermon,
" Wisdom built her a house," "nowise man would build house
on ruinous foundation." Ans. a) In his De Qua3stt. Arm.
viii. 15, expressly concludes from Scr. that all except Christ
had orig. sin, and distinguishing her sanctif. from that of
John B. and Jer., says that the B. Y. never committed sin.
b) Assertion unproved ; c) improbable on grounds so slight.
11) Peter Comestor. Passage alleged, Si fieri posset, &c.
does not deny what he had said (ab. c. 14). 12) Alex.
Nequam. Ans. His contrary teaching allowed by opponent ;
no proof of retractation. 13) Rob. Lincoln, De Laud. B. Y.
Citation (as T. had read in tract) was suspected ; said that
he never held that doctrine. 14) Hen. de Hassia, modern
512 Analysis of Card, de Turrecrematrfs
doctor. Ans. Held that neither was to be asserted or con-
demned. 15) Ant. de Butrio. Ans. Only related, " I hear that
now Church has approved doctrine of Franciscans, and so that
she was not conceived in orig. sin." Untrue, else question
would not be before Council.
8. Franciscans alleged, Peter Aurelii, Tract on the Cone.,
Pet. Thoma3, Ep. to Infanta of Aragon, Francis de Mairon,
Pet. of Candia (in his obedience, Alex. V.), Francis of Asti,
Ludolph of Naples, Ocham in his Quodl. ; Augustinian, Tho. de
Argentina ; Carmelites, Pet. Thomse, Patr. of Jerus. de Laud.
B. V. and Bacho., also John of Basle, Bp., and, by last pro-
ponent, Fr. de Sainbarellis, tit. de feriis. Ans. If granted that
they did, not to be compared to testimonies of H. Scr. and
doctors cited c. 12 (ff. 262 v. — 265).
C. 95. Miracles alleged by John Vitalis, that Alex. Nequarn,
three other Dom. or Franciscans, had been seized with diseases
(some dying) for asserting Cone, in orig. sin. Ans. Such
miracles fictitious. T. had inquired of aged fathers of his order
in different provinces, had they seen or heard any thing of
this sort ? they ridiculed it. Ans. As to miracles said to be
related by S. Anselm, later (f. 265).
C. 96. Ans. to question proposed by Council ; That is most
pious, which is most to honour of the Redeemer, a) That He
Alone was conceived without orig. sin; b) He the Universal Re-
deemer. Also most maintains faith and devotion to the Passion.
2) Most to the honour of B. V., Mother of the Universal Re-
deemer; 3) That is most piously to be believed which is most con-
formable to Scr. (ab. c. 11) ; 4) which is so probable through
consequence of Scr. and clearness of reason, that no Scr. or
true reason opposes (esp. c. 25—29). Obj. Commonly in
Church some things are said to be more pious, inflaming affec-
tions and instructing intellect ; devout piety more regarded than
certain faith ; probability enough. Instance, belief that some
of our Lord's Blood remained on the earth after His Resurrec-
tion, against S. Thomas. Ans. That is not to be called devotion
which, neglecting the doctrine of the Fathers, rests on teaching
of some few, inferior in authority, repute, and wisdom. Holy
Scr. dictated by Holy Spirit, remains more entire ; necessity of
Divine Incarnation more venerated ; dignity of Christ, and uni-
work on the Conception of the B. V. 513
versality of His Redemption more guarded. People only
against the doctrine, because ill-taught (ff. 265 v. — 266 v.).
C. 97. On Feast of Conception of B. V.
Three conclusions — 1) Conception of B. V. not to be held
on its own account. Arg. Chiefly from S. Bern. Concl. 2)
That it may be celebrated by reason of sanctification, following
proximately on Cone, of nature. S. Thorn, (ab. p. 223),
S. Bonav. (ab. p. 363). 3) "The festival, if to be celebrated,
were better called F. of her Sanctification." 1) Alvarus, an
excellent doctor in Canon law, and primarius in Roman curia
(as ab.). Ancient custom in Home, abiding among Carthusians,
the most religious Church of Gironne, and many other most
sacred places of Christendom, and Dominicans. F. to be kept
for that which is supernatural, Sanctification, not what was
natural, Conception (ff. 266 v.— 269).
C. 98. Obj. 1) The three miracles in Ep. asserted to be S.
Anselm's; 2) his alleged Epistle ; 3) from the alleged institution
of Koman Church ; 4) common use and practice of Christian
people; 5) that though conceived in orig. sin, a) from that
mass Christ was to be born ; b) like foundation-stone of temple ;
c) some special miracle as to the purifying seminum ; d) Revel,
to Anne and Joachim ; e, /) because certain that her personal
Cone, would be in grace.
Ans. to 1, account of miracles not authentic, so S. Bern.,
S. Bonav. 2) Ep. given to S. Anselm, not genuine ; a) because
it speaks of Wm. Conqueror in the past, and counts it long
since; 5) difference of style; c) contradicts S. Bern., who
speaks of fest. as new ; d) unlikely objects of revelation ;
deacon, married though persuaded by B. V. to abandon it, and
adulterous priest ; e) grounds for celebration, unworthy S. Ans.
/) doctrine contradicts S. Ans., and, as to union of soul with
bodv, angels intervening, the schools ; g) no such treatise
in Vine. Histor. ; Ji) direction alleged, to substitute Cone, for
Nativ., not observed, as shown by many Brev. and Missals.
Ans. to 2) not S. Anselm's ; to 3) Eoman Church tolerates,
does not keep it ; to 4) " custom without truth, antiquity of
error." S. Cypr. Not true, that Church celebrated the Cone,
without view to subsequent sanctif. ; to 5) then Cone, of
John B. might be celebrated (ff. 269—272 v.).
K k
514 Analysis of Card, de Turrecrematds
C. 99. Twenty differences between the two doctrines.
1. That to be conceived without orig. sin was a singular pre-
rogative of Christ, denied by maintainers of Imm. Cone. Falsely
imputed that B. V. was odious and hated by God, which could
not be without actual sin. To have had for some time or moment
something displeasing to God, true, yet nothing opprobrious
or blameworthy to the person so conceived, nor " infected with
malice," nor "most worthy of all blame," nor "handmaid or ser-
vant of the devil" (ab. C. 28), — the chief arms of opponents.
2. This doctrine is zealous to maintain entire the prerogatives
of Christ, which the H. Ghost, through Scripture or the holy
Fathers, designated as belonging to Christ Alone.
3. It confesses Christ, as incomparably superior and more
excellent than all the saints.
4. It maintains the true privileges of B. V., as to have con-
ceived a Son without orig. sin. S. Bern. Theophilus.
5. It is more consonant to faith and piety of ancient "Fathers,
S. Bonav.
6. It rests on authorities of Scr. in their literal meaning ; but
the opposite on mystic and parabolic.
7. In adducing authorities, it aims at taking meaning of Scr.
according to tradition and exposition of the Fathers, and not
to stretch the sense beyond the limits assigned by them.
8. In its reasons and grounds of proof, it rests not (as wrongly
imputed) on authorities of H. Scr. which speak only generally,
but on special also, borne out by the glosses of the saints ;
the contrary (as shown above) is rested really on no authority
of Scr., either generally or specially, formally or argumentatively
founding or corroborating it.
9. It is more conformable to the doctrine of the saints
(ab. c. 12) ; the contrary, well considered, has not one who says
directly, that the B. Y. was not conceived in orig. sin, Aug.,
Anselm., Maxim., S. Ildef. (as adduced), do not support it.
10. It is older, yea the faith (as shown ab.) of all the old
Fathers, from the beginning of the Church. False then that not
found before Anselm, who asserted it. S. Bernard called the
opposite [rather the Festival] a novelty, "presumed upon
against the rite of the Church, [a novelty] mother of temerity,
sister of superstition, daughter of levity." Bonaventura said
work on the Conception of the B. V. 515
that he had heard of none who asserted immunity of B. V. from
orig. sin (ab. p. 220).
11. It has most evidence of reason, founded on the firm rock
of the Canon, sayings of Saints, privileges and prerogatives of
Christ and the B. V. (as seen in 50 Reasons, c. 16 — 22).
Opposite is grounded only on certain typical, and parabolic or
mystical, or evidently false propositions, or unauthentic reve-
lations.
12. It has most favour in the schools of the doctors (c. 14)
including all the Canonists ; the opposite has very few, novel,
and (as compared with the others) of very small reputation
and authority.
13. This doctrine (as Bonav. says) being among holy Doctors
the more common, more reasonable, the safer and more con-
formable to the piety of faith, is most acceptable in the case of
wise and God-fearing doctors. "What is alleged on the con-
trary, that it is so detested among Christian people, that they
do not endure the mention of it, but that the opposite is most
grateful to all, is false. For when it is duly explained, as-
signing its grounds and necessity, it is most acceptable to the
Christian. It would be useful to consider, how the opposite
doctrine was introduced, whether by the Apostolic See, or by
Councils. " No ; but in many places it was introduced with
violence, threats, defamation, of which I could mention much
in detail as to the ways and practices of some in the intro-
duction of the aforesaid doctrine. But I pass it over, hones-
tatis gratia."
14. It asserts that the B. V. was redeemed by the Blood of
her Son, and so that Christ was the universal Redeemer ; the
opposite, denying that theB.V. was ever a captive by the
servitude of sin, in fact denies that she was redeemed by
Christ at the price of His Blood, and so that Christ was an
universal Redeemer (quoting Pope Zosimus in support).
15. It asserts that the B. Y. was washed or cleansed by the
Blood of Christ (as in Rev. 1) ; the contrary, asserting that she
never had any spot, in fact denies it.
16. It asserts that the B. V. was reconciled by the Death of
Christ. The opposite, asserting that she never had any fault,
denies that Christ was her Reconciler and Mediator (c. 27).
K k 2
516 Analysis of Card, de Turrecremata? s
17. It asserts that the B. Y. needed the oblation of Christ,
our High Priest (Eph. 5) ; the opposite, asserting that the
B. V. was not subject to any sin, says that she needed not the
oblation and Sacrifice of Christ, as was shown (c. 22) from the
declaration of the Council of Ephesus.
18. It asserts that the B. V. belonged to that hundredth
sheep which perished when the first man went astray, to seek
and to save whom the heavenly Shepherd, leaving the ninety-
nine, i. e. the heavenly host, came down to earth. The opposite,
asserting that she was not conceived in original sin (seeing she
committed no actual), implies that she belongs not to these
hundred sheep.
19. It asserts that the door of the kingdom of heaven was
opened by the key of the Passion of Christ, quoting Inn. III. (in
c. majores, extra de bapt.) : the contrary, asserting that the B.V.
was never subject to orig. sin, denies that the kingdom of
heaven was ever closed to her, and so that it was opened to her
by Christ.
20. It is more pleasing to the B. Y. than the contrary, since
the glorious Yirgin, being full of truth and the mother of the
Truth, takes no pleasure save in truth (quoting S. Bern, and
S. Bonav. (ft. 272 v.— 275 v.).
C. 100. Epilogus, apologizing for imperfection through " the
multitude of other occupations and shortness of time," and at
the same time for its length, on account of, —
1) The fulness of H. Scr. and the Fathers in support ; 2) the
especial duties of Prof, of Theol. to elucidate, defend, and
enlarge the truth; 3) the glory and dignity of our Saviour
Jesus Christ, God and Man, "Whose glory and the prerogatives
of Whose dignity this doctrine zealously strives to maintain
uninjured; 4) zeal of devotion to the Blood, the Price of our
redemption, the plenitude of whose universality this doctrine
defends with the utmost devotion ; 5) the question of the
prerogatives, dignity, and privileges of the most glorious B.Y.,
which this doctrine is known to strive with most earnest zeal
of devotion to maintain. 6) Keverence for saints so great, and
scholastic doctors of Divine and human law, whose this doctrine
commonly was ; 7) the profuseness of the discourse in behalf
of the opposite doctrine, whose largeness could not be briefly
work on the Conception of the B. V. 517
answered. Some things however he omitted, many as being
plainly said without foundation of truth ; many as irrelevant ;
some as detracting from the authority of the holy doctors, the
pillars and ground of the truth ; some as injurious, which he
omitted honestatis causa, wishing " so to fulfil my ministry, in
defending the truth of those doctors, that charity should remain
unimpaired" (f. 276).
De Turrecremata, at the end of his work, adds to his state-
ment in the work on the " Decretals " (ab. p. 290) these facts : —
" "When, this work being completed, I, the aforesaid magister
John de Turrecremata, master of the Apostolic sacred Palace,
in full congregation of the Council of Basle, offered myself as
prepared to make the relation enjoined me (as a public instru-
ment was made hereon), I was answered through the most
reverend lord Card, of S. Angelo, Apostolic legate and pre-
sident of our holy Lord ; that, since the Fathers of the holy
Council were at present much occupied about the arrival of the
Greeks, they could not then attend to the aforesaid matter of
the Conception of the B. V. ; whence they thought that, with
good reason, this matter was to be superseded till the arrival of
the Greeks. I then, whose business it was to obey the injunc-
tions of my superiors, abstained from any further request for
an audience. Yet I remained for several months at Basle, ever
ready to make the aforesaid relation, if I should be asked for.
At last, when a most grave and scandalous discussion arose
between some Fathers residing at Basle, and our holy Lord
Eugenius, as to the place whither the Greeks should come,
the lords Legates, and presidents, and other good men, whom
the temerities of those of Basle very much displeased, de-
parting, I too determined to depart from them, as ill-minded as
to the faith of Christ, betaking myself with the book of my
relation to the Apostolic See, which is the mistress of faith, and
in which (as Jerome says) the Christian religion ever remained
undefiled. From all this any well-instructed man will under-
stand most clearly, how void and invalid the determination is,
which some say was made at Basle in the aforesaid matter of
the Conception of the B. V. after my departure. It is invalid
in truth, being made against the plainest testimonies of the
holy Fathers of the Church, and against the express doctrine of
518 Analysis of Card, de Turrecremata Js work.
the principal doctors of Divine and human law, as may be seen,
as clear as light, from the aforesaid work. Invalid also and
void of all authority is the aforesaid determination, 1) because
it was made after the departure of the most reverend Lord
Cardinal Legates and Lord President, and so by certain
Acephali ; 2) because it was made after the translation of the
Council from Basle to Bologna, and so not by a synod of the
Universal Church (as some lie), but by a certain congregation
of Satan and church of malignants ; 3) because it was made by
those who, for their errors and devilish temerities, were excom-
municated and most justly condemned as heretics and schis-
matics by the Apostolic See and Synod of the holy Universal
Church, as appears from the processes made at Bologna and
Florence against them (if. 275 v.— 276 v.).
ADDENDA.
P. 257. The extract from Paulus Salusius de Perusio rests
on the authority of De Alva, who quotes it from De Turrecre-
mata (note 238), " Turrecremata adduces his authority thus :
' The same holds Mag. Paulus de Perusio in 3 Sent. dist. 3,
saying thus, " It is firmly to be held," ' &c." In his work, as
published, the references only, not the words, are given. The
substance is given much more fully in Dr. Bandelis, pp. 88, 89.
P. 258. De Turr. introduces his quotation from Nicolas
Treveth with the praise " A great man, as is inferred from his
most celebrated works, speaking of the celebration of the
Feast of the Conception of the B. V. which takes place in
some Churches, after much more, says that ' the day,' &c." and
adds at the close, " For this would be superstitious."
Of John de Monte Nigro, to whom de Turrecremata
frequently refers, as his colleague, who had opened the subject
on the same side, and whose grounds he maintained against
John of Segovia and others, Quetif says (i. 799), —
" He was a man of great parts, a subtle philosopher, profound theologian,
skilled in Greek as few, acute and self-possessed in disputation. He was
long, from 1483, Provincial of Upper Lombardy, and still held the office
A. 1443. In General Councils convened in that period, whereat he was
present at the command of the Sovereign Pontiff, and was very distin-
guished, he is often called Br. John Provincial, without any addition. He
was sent first by Eugenius IV. to the Council of Basle, where he showed
remarkable instances of his wisdom, in defending the articles of the
Catholic faith and the mind of S. Thomas, as also in maintaining the rights
of the Sovereign Pontiff."
He too left Basle, when it became a Conciliabulurn, was
520 Addenda.
one of the six Latin deputies chosen to dispute with the
Greeks at Ferrara on the Procession of God the Holy Ghost,
and took the chief part in the same disputation at Florence.
His disputation was much praised by Joseph of Methone, who
took the same side against Mark of Ephesus. Quetif quotes
from Cone. Flor. col. 698. 702. 710, 711. 715, ed. Labbe.
His work was written in the Council of Basle, A.D. 1435 or
1436. It has lain hid in the Libraries at Basle (Haenel's
Catalogue, col. 637. Quetif 1. 800) and Bologna (Ib. 823).
END OF EIEENICON, PAET II.
WOKKS by the Eev, E. B. PUSEY, D.D.
ELEVEN ADDRESSES DURING a RETREAT of the
COMPANIONS of the LOVE of JESUS, engaged in Perpetual
Intercession for the Conversion of Sinners. 8vo, cloth, 3s. 6d.
The CHURCH of ENGLAND a PORTION of CHRIST'S
ONE HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH, and a MEANS of RESTORING
VISIBLE UNITY: an EIEENICON, in a Letter to the Author of
" The Christian Year." 8vo, cloth, 7s. 6d.
The MINOR PROPHETS ; with a Commentary Explanatory
and Practical, and Introductions to the SeveraU Books. 4to, sewed,
5s. each Part.
Part I. contains HOSEA — JOEL, INTRODUCTION. I Part III. AMOS vi. 7 to MICAH i. 12.
Part II. JOEL, INTRODUCTION — AMOS vi. 6. - | Part IV. [In the Press.
DANIEL the PROPHET: Nine Lectures delivered in the
Divinity School of the University of Oxford. With a new Preface.
Third Edition. (Fifth Thousand.) 8vo, cloth, 10s. 6d.
The COUNCILS of the CHURCH, from the Council of
Jerusalem to the close of the 2nd General Council of Constantinople,
A.D. 381. 1857. Ws.Gd.
SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE of HOLY BAPTISM. Printed
in the Tracts for the Times.
The DOCTRINE of the REAL PRESENCE, as contained
in the Fathers from the Death of St. John the Evangelist to the Fourth
General Council. 1855. 12*.
The REAL PRESENCE the DOCTRINE of the ENGLISH
CHURCH ; with a Vindication of the Reception by the Wicked, and of
the Adoration of our Lord Jesus Christ truly Present. 1857. 9*.
The ROYAL SUPREMACY not an ARBITRARY AUTHO-
RITY, but Limited by the Laws of the Church, of which Kings are
Members. Ancient Precedents. 8vo, 7*.
CASE as to the LEGAL FORCE of the JUDGMENT of
the PRIVY COUNCIL in re FENDALL v. WILSON; with the
Opinion of the ATTOBNEY-GENEEAL and Sir HUGH CAIENS, and a
Preface to those who Love God and His Truth. 8vo, Gd.
The CHURCH of ENGLAND LEAVES her CHILDREN
FREE to whom to OPEN their GRIEFS: a Letter to the Rev.
W. U. RICHAEDS. 8vo, with Postscript, 5s.
LETTER to the LORD BISHOP of LONDON, in Explana-
tion of some Statements contained in a Letter by the Rev. W.
DODSWOETH. (Fifth Thousand.) 16rno, 1*.
RENEWED EXPLANATIONS in consequence of Mr.
DODSWOETH'S Comments on the above. 8vo, 1*.
COLLEGIATE and PROFESSORIAL TEACHING and
DISCIPLINE, in answer to Professor VAUGHAN. 5*.
MARRIAGE with a DECEASED WIFE'S SISTER;
together with a SPEECH on the same subject by E. BADELEY, Esq.
3*. 6d.
2 Works by the Rev. E. £. Pusey, D.D. (continued).
GOD'S PROHIBITION of the MARRIAGE with a
DECEASED WIFE'S SISTER (Lev. xviii. 6) not to be set aside
by an Inference from His Limitation of Polygamy among the Jews
(Lev. xviii. 18). 8vo, Is.
WOEKS Edited by the Eev, E. B. PUSEY, D.D.
VILLAGE SERMONS on the BAPTISMAL SERVICE.
By the Rev. J. KEBLE. 8vo, 15*.
TRACT XC. On certain Passages in the XXXIX Articles,
by the Rev. J. H. NEWMAN, M.A., 1841 ; with Historical Preface by
E. B. PUSEY, D.D. ; and Catholic Subscription to the XXXIX Articles
considered in reference to Tract XC., by the Rev. JOHN KEBLE, M.A.,
1851. 8vo, sewed, 1*. 6d.
The SPIRITUAL COMBAT ; with the PATH of PARADISE ;
and the SUPPLEMENT; or, The Peace of the Soul. By SCUPOLI.
(From the Italian.) (Sixth Thousand, revised.) 3s. 6d.
---- Cheap Edition, in wrapper, Qd. ;
fine paper, limp cloth, 1*.
The YEAR of AFFECTIONS ; or, Sentiments on the Love of
God, drawn from the Canticles, for every Day in the Year. By
AYEILLON. (Second Thousand.) 6s. 6d.
A GUIDE for PASSING LENT HOLILY. By AVKILLOK.
12mo, cloth, price 6s. (Fourth Edition.) In the Press.
A GUIDE for PASSING ADVENT HOLILY. By AVBIL-
LON. (New Edition.) In the Press.
The LIFE of JESUS CHRIST in GLORY: Daily Medita-
tions from Easter Day to the Wednesday after Trinity Sunday. By
NOUET. 8s. (Second Thousand.) Or in Two Parts, at 4*. each.
The FOUNDATIONS of the SPIRITUAL LIFE : a Com-
mentary. on Thomas a Kempis. (Second Thousand.) By SUBIN.
4*. 6d.
PARADISE for the CHRISTIAN SOUL. By HOEST. Two
Vols. (Fourth Thousand.) 6s. 6d.
LENT READINGS from the FATHERS. In the Press.
ADVENT READINGS from the FATHERS. (New Edition)
In the Press. 5*.
MEDITATIONS and SELECT PRAYERS of ST. ANSELM.
From the " Paradise for the Christian Soul."
DEVOTIONS for HOLY COMMUNION. (Third Thousand.)
18mo, 1*.
LITANIES. In the words of Holy Scripture. Royal 32mo,
6d.
SERMONS by the Eev. E, B. PUSEY.
Vol. I. (Fifth Editu
•Vol. II. (Fourth Edition.) 8vo,
PAEOCHIAL SEEMONS. Vol. I. (Fifth Edition.) 8vo,
cloth, 6*.
cloth, 6,?.
ELEVEN SEEMONS (with others) preached in the Octave of
the Consecration of St. Saviour's, Leeds. (Second Thousand.)
SEEMONS preached before the University of Oxford, between
1856 and 1865. In the Press.
SINGLE OCCASIONAL SEEMONS.
I. THE DAY OP JUDGMENT. at Margaret Chapel, on the General Fast
Preached at St. Paul's Church, Brighton, ®W> 1847' (Second Thousand.) Is.
1839. (Fourth Thousand.) 6d. VII. THE BLASPHEMY AGAINST
II. CHEIST THE SOUECE AND RULE THE HOLY GHOST. Preached at All
OF CHRISTIAN LOVE. Preached at St. Saints', Margaret-street, 1845. 1*.
Paul's Church, Bristol, 1840. (Second VIII. Do ALL TO- THE LOED JESUS.
Thousand.) Is. Gd. Preached at All Saints', Margaret-street.
III. THE PKEACHING- OF THE Gos- (Fifth Thousand.) 6d.
PEL A PREPARATION FOR OUR LORD'S IX., X. THE DANGER OF ElCHES.
COMING. Preached at St. Andrew's, SEEK GOD FIRST, AND TE SHALL HAVE
Clifton, for the S.P.G., 1841. (Second ALL. Two Sermons preached at Bristol,
Thousand.) Is. 1850. (Second Thousand.) Is. Gd.
IV., V. GOD is LOVE. WHOSO XI., XII. THE CHUECH THE CON-
RECEIVETH ONE SUCH LlTTLE CHILD VERIER OP THE HEATHEN : TWO Ser-
IN MY NAME RECEIVETH ME. Two - mons preached at Melcombe Regis, 1838.
Sermons preached at Ilfracombe, 1844. (Third Thousand.) 12mo, 6d.
(Second Thousand.) Is. 6d. XIII. A SEEMON PEEACHED AT
VI. CHASTISEMENTS NEGLECTED, THE CONSECRATION OF GROVE CHURCH,
FORERUNNERS OF GREATER. Preached 1832. Third Edition. 6d.
The above in one Volume, price 7s. 6d.
LIFE, THE PEEPAEATION FOR DEATH : a Sermon preached at Great St.
Mary's, Cambridge, 1807. 6d.
OUB PHARISAISM : a Sermon preached at St. Paul's, Knightsbridge, on Ash-
Wednesday, 1868. 6d.
SINGLE UNIVEESITY SEEMONS.
I. THE HOLY EUCHAEIST A COM- VI. THE RULE OF FAITH, AS MAIN-
FORT FOR THE PENITENT. Preached TAINED BY THE FATHERS AND CHURCH
1843. (Nineteenth Thousand.) ]s. OF ENGLAND. Preached 1851. (Second
II., III. ENTIEE ABSOLUTION OF Thousand.) 8vo, is.
THE PENITENT: Two Sermons. Preached VTT VT1T ATT PATTTT TV,™ PT^TI
IMG. (Fifth Thousand and Second Thou- Vll., VIII. ALL *AITH THE GIFT
sand) Is each OK GOD. REAL FAITH ENTIRE. Preached
IV. THE PRESENCE OF CHEIST IN 1855- (Second Thousand.) 2,.
THE HOLY EUCHARIST. Preached 1853. IX. PATIENCE AND CONFIDENCE
(Second Thousand.) Is. THE STRENGH OF THE CHURCH.
V. JUSTIFICATION. Preached 1853. Preached on Nov. 5, 1837. (Third Thou-
(Second Thousand.) Is. sand.) Is.
The above in one Volume, price 7s. 6d.
EVERLASTING PUNISHMENT : a Sermon preached before the University of
Oxford, 1804. 6d.
WILL TE ALSO GO AWAY? a Sermon preached before the University of
Oxford, 1867. With PREFACE and APPENDIX. Is.
LENTEN SEEMONS.
REPENTANCE FEOM LOVE OF GOD, OF THE BODY : a Sermon for Young
LIFELONG : a Sermon preached in St. Men. Preached 1861. (Second Thousand.)
Mary's Church, Oxford, 1857. Is. ba-
THE THOUGHT OF THE LOVE OF THE SPIEIT CoMFOETiNa. Preached
JESUS FOR US THE REMEDY FOR SlNS 1863. 1*.
Kftrtrp of tfie Jfatfters
OP THE HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH, ANTERIOR TO THE
DIVISION OF THE EAST AND WEST.
Translated by Members oftlie English Church.
VOLUMES PUBLISHED. *%$£* s£Krib-
Vol. £ s. d. £ s.' d.
1. St. Augustine's Confessions. Third Edition 090070
2. St. Cyril's Lectures. Third Edition . 0 10 6 0 80
3. St. Cyprian's Treatises. Second Edition. 0 10 6 0 80
4 & 5. St. Chrysostom on 1 Cor., 2 vols. . 0 18 0 0 14 0
*6. St. Chrysostom on Galatians andEphesians.
*7. St. Chrysostom on Romans
8. St. Athanasius against the Arians . .090070
9. St. Chrysostom, Homilies on the Statues. 0 12 0 0 90
10. Tertullian. Second Edition, Vol. I. . 0 15 0 0 11 0
11. St. Chrysostom on St. Matthew. Part I. 0 12 0 0 90
12. onTimothy,Titus,andPhilemon 0 12 0 0 90
13. St. Athanasius' Historical Tracts. He-
printing.
* 14. St. Chrysostom, Homilies on Philippians,
&c.
15. HomiliesonSt.Matthew.Pt.il. 0 12 0 0 90
16. St. Augustine's Sermons. Vol. I. . . 0 14 0 0 10 6
17. St. Cyprian's Epistles . . . . 0 12 0 0 9 0
18. St. Gregory the Great on Job. Vol. I. . 0 15 0 0110
19. St. Athanasius against the Arians. Part II. 0 10 6 0 80
20. St. Augustine's Sermons. Vol. II. Re-
printing.
21. St. Gregory the Great, Morals, &c. Vol.11. 0 15 0 0 11 0
22. St. Augustine's short Treatises . . 0 16 0 0 12 0
23. St. Gregory, Morals, Ac. Vol. III. Part I. 0 10 6 0 80
24. St. Augustine on the Psalms. Vol. I. . 0 10 6 0 80
25. St. Augustine on the Psalms. Vol. II. . 0 10 6 0 80
26. St. Augustine on St. John. Vol. I. . 0 14 0 0 10 6
27. St. Chrysostom on 2 Corinthians . . 0 10 6 0 8 0
28. St. Chrysostom on St. John. Vol. I. . 0 10 6 0 80
29. St. Augustine on St. John. Vol. II. . 0 16 0 0 12 0
30. St. Augustine on the Psalms. Vol. III. . 0 14 0 0 10 6
31. St. Gregory, Morals, Ac. Vol.111. Part II. 0 15 0 0 11 0
32. St. Augustine on the Psalms. Vol. IV. . 0 14 0 0 10 6
33. St. Chrysostom on the Acts. Part I. . 0 10 6 0 8 0
34. St. Chrysostom on St. Matthew. Part III. 0 12 0 0 90
35. St. Chrysostom on the Acts. Part II. . 0 10 6 0 80
36. St. Chrysostom on St. John. Part II. . 0 14 0 0 10 6
37. St. Augustine on the Psalms. Vol. V. . 0 12 0 0 90
38. St. Athanasius, Festal Epistles . .060046
39 St. Augustine on the Psalms. Vol. VI. . 0 14 0 0 10 6
40. St. Justin Martyr 080060
41. St. Ephrem's Rhythms (from the Syriac) 0 14 0 0 10 6
42. St. Irenseus, by the Rev. J. Keble. In the Press.
* In the course of revision after the improved Text by the Rev. F. FIELD.
Library of the Fathers (continued).
Published Subscrib.
price. price.
£ s. d. £ s. d.
ST. ATHANASIUS against the Arians. 2
vols. (Third Thousand.) (With very full illus-
trative notes on the history of the times, and the
faith in the Trinity and the Incarnation. The
most important work published since Bishop
Bull) . . . . . . . 0 19 60 15 0
Historical Tracts. (St.
Athanasius is the historian of the period.)
(Second Thousand) 0 10 0080
The Festal Epistles. (The
work recently recovered in the Syriac translation) 0 60 0 46
ST. AUGUSTINE'S Confessions. (Fourth
Thousand. With notes. (Containing his early life
and conversion. The notes illustrate the Con-
fessions from St. Augustine himself) . . .0900/0
. Sermons on the New Test.
2 vols. (Clear and thoughtful expositions of Holy
Scripture to the poor of Hippo, with rhetorical
skill in fixing their attention.) (Second Thousand) 1 80 1 10
Homilies on the Psalms.
6 vols. (Full of those concise sayings on Chris-
tian doctrine and morals, which contain so much
truth accurately expressed in few words) .3150 2160
on the Gospel and First
Epistle of St. John. 2 vols. (At all times one
of the favourite works of St. Augustine)
(Second Thousand) 1 10 0126
Practical Treatises (chiefly
on the doctrines of Grace) (Second Thousand) 0 16 0 0 12 0
ST. CHEYSOSTOM on St. Matthew. (Third
Thousand. 3 vols 1160170
on St. John. 2 vols. .1 46 0 18 6
on the Acts. 2 vols. .1 10 0 16 0
on St. Paul's Epistles
(excepting those on the Epistle to the Hebrews,
which are completed). 7 vols. in 6. (Third and
Second Thousand) 400300
(These contain the whole of that great Father's
exposition of the N.T. still extant, and occupy five
vols. folio of the Benedictine Edition. St.Chrysostom,
besides the eloquence of his perorations, is remark-
able for his care in developing the connexion of
Holy Scripture.)
to the People of
Antioch. (The celebrated homilies, where St.
Chrysostom employed the fears of the people at
the Emperor's displeasure to call them to repent-
ance.) (Second Thousand) 0 12 0 0 9 0
6 Library of the Fathers (continued).
Published Subscrib.
price. price.
ST. CYPRIAN'S Works. (Third Thousand.)
(St. Cyprian, besides his great practical wisdom,
states the doctrines of grace as carefully as if he
had lived after the Pelagian heresy. He was a
great favourite of Dean Milner. He is a witness
of the early independence of the several Churches) 1 26 0 17 0
ST. EPHREM'S Rhythms on the Nativity,
and on Faith. (From the Syriac. A very
devout writer of the mystical school, and full
on the doctrine of the Incarnation.) (Second
Thousand) 0 14 0 0 10 G
ST. GREGORY THE GREAT on Book of
Job. 4 vols. (Called the Magna Moralia, from
the depth of the observations on human nature
of one who lived in close communion with God) .2150 2 20
TERTULLIAN'S Apologetical and Practical
Treatises. (The treatises, especially the Apolo-
getic, have, over and above, much historical
information on early Christianity. They are
full of those frequent sayings of deep practical
truth, for which his name is almost proverbial.)
(Third Thousand) 0 15 0 0 12 0
ST. JUSTIN THE MARTYR. Works now
extant 080060
ST. IRENJEUS, the Works of. Translated
by the late Rev. JOHN KEBLE. In the Press. .
ORIGINAL TEXTS.
ST. AUGUSTINI Confessiones (revised with
the use of some Oxford MSS. and early editions.)
ST. CHRYSOSTOMI in Epist. ad Romanes 0 12 0 0 00
ad Corinthios I. . . 0 14 0 0 10 6
ad Corinthios II. . 0 10 6 0 8 0
ad Galatas et Ephesios 090070
ad Phil., Coloss., Thes. 0 14 0 0 10 6
ad Tim., Tit., Philem. 0 10 6 0 80
ad Hebrseos . 0 12 0 0 90
Or the set . £4 10 0 3 9 0
(For this edition all the good MSS. of St. Chrysostora in public libraries
in Europe have been collated, and the Rev. F. Field having employed his
great critical acumen upon them, the English edition of St. Chrysostorn is,
so far, the best extant, as Sir H. Savile's was in his day.)
THEODORETI ad Romanos, Cor., et Gal. 0 10 6 0 80
(The second volume, containing the rest of Theodoret's Commentary on
St. Paul, was nearly completed by the Rev. C. Marriott, when the Church
was suddenly deprived of his unwearied labours. The few remaining sheets,
and the collations belonging to them, having now been found among his
papers, the volume will shortly be published.)
§2 tire tm
In the Press.
EIRENICON. PART III.
A SECOND LETTER TO THE VERY REV. DR. NEWMAN,
On the Possibility of Corporate Re-union and of Explanation
on the part of Rome.
"With an Appendix in answer to the Rev. T. HARPER'S Strictures.
THE MINOR PROPHETS. PART IV.
(Stetei I)H % swe.
THE SUFFERINGS OF OUR LORD
JESUS CHRIST.
BY F. THOMAS, FROM THE PORTUGUESE.
2 Vols.
To le pullislied after Trinity Sunday.
LONDON :
GILBERT AND RIVINOTON, PRINTERS,'
ST. JOHN'S SQUARE.
I. ft E. BELLAMY,
Bi
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11