Scotus Academicus, Tomus octavus: De Divino Gratiae Beneficio, et initium De Virtutibus Theologicis

Note 1. Concerning the resolution of the present Question, the error of the heretics of this time is twofold: for Calvin in lib. 3. Instit. cap. 11. n. 22. teaches that in justification sins are not truly taken away, but covered; not eradicated, but scraped; not blotted out, but covered over, on account of the justice of Christ imputed to us; so that sins are said to be covered, as if they were not seen by God, while he does not punish them: and scraped away, as if they did not appear. Thence, in lib. 4. cap. 15. he says: It is now perspicuous how false is what certain men taught long ago, that by baptism we are loosed and exempted from original sin. The same Luther had asserted, as is evident from the second article among those condemned by Leo X. Their second error is that sin is covered and not imputed in justification in such a way that nothing of punishment ever remains to be paid to God, but the guilt of the whole punishment is abolished together with the fault.

Note 2. A twofold non-imputation and covering of sins can be conceived. First, so that they truly subsist and are only hidden: secondly, so that they are utterly blotted out: just as ulcers of the body, from which this metaphor is taken, can be said to be covered in two ways: first, namely by only hiding them, that they may not appear, in which manner they are covered by the wounded man himself. Secondly, by curing and removing them, in which manner they are cut away by the physician. Which Saint Augustine indeed expressly explains in enarratione 2. in Psal. 31. saying:

God therefore covers the wounds, not thou; for if thou, being ashamed, shalt wish to cover them, the physician will not cure them. Let the physician cover and cure, for he covers with a plaster; under the covering of the physician the wound is healed, under the covering of the wounded man the wound is concealed.

Similarly twofold is non-imputation: one indeed whereby that which is is not imputed: the second truly whereby that which really is not is not imputed. The former covering, and non-imputation, is the figment of the heretics: the latter is the Catholic assertion.

Note 3. So great, and so infinitely perfect, is the sanctity and justice of God, that if any man among mortals, however just, be compared with God, he appears unjust, as the stars and any other heavenly bodies, although shining from elsewhere, are darkened by the presence of the Sun and lie hidden as though wrapped in darkness: not because they truly do not shine, but because their lesser splendor is as it were extinguished and swallowed up by the super-shining light of the sun. Hence the unanimous voice of the just was with Job: Verely I know it is so, and that man cannot be justified compared with God. And in the same place, chapter 4: Shall man be justified in comparison of God, or shall man be more pure than his maker? Behold, they that serve him are not steadfast, and in his angels he found perversity: how much more they who dwell in houses of clay, who have an earthly foundation, shall be consumed as by a moth? Wherefore the Royal Prophet prayed Psal. 130: Enter not into judgment with thy servant, for in thy sight no man living shall be justified. Yet it does not thence follow, as Calvin wills in lib. 3. Instit. cap. 12., that men, however just, are truly always defiled with sin, nor that there is anyone shining with whatsoever sanctity who is not sullied by the veiled darkness of the crime of his own admission, whereby he would appear deformed and most foul before God, unless he shone and were aspectable through the justice of Christ superinduced upon him as it were a royal and most precious mantle; which error indeed will be refuted

Single Conclusion. — IN THE JUSTIFICATION OF ANY SINNER WHATEVER MORTAL SINS ARE SO REMITTED THAT THEY ARE TRULY BLOTTED OUT AND WASHED AWAY.

This is of faith, determined in the Council of Trent, Session 6, Can. 5. If anyone denies that by the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is conferred in Baptism, the guilt of original sin is remitted, or even asserts that everything having the true and proper nature of sin is not taken away, but says that it is only scraped, or not imputed, let him be anathema.

This Catholic truth is proved by all those oracles of sacred Scripture in which it is openly pronounced that God blots out and takes away sins: thus Psal. 50, Blot out my iniquity... blot out all my iniquities. Isaias 43, I am he that blots out thy iniquities for my own sake. Micheae 7, Who is a God like unto thee, who takes away iniquity? Zachariae 3, Behold I have taken away thy iniquity. And further: Behold I will engrave the graving thereof, saith the Lord of hosts, and I will take away the iniquity of that land in one day. — It is proved similarly from those sacred texts which teach that we are cleansed and washed from sins far more perfectly than bodies are washed by natural water and cleansed from filth: thus Psal. 50, Thou shalt sprinkle me with hyssop, O Lord, and I shall be cleansed: thou shalt wash me, and I shall be made whiter than snow:

Ezech. 36, I will pour upon you clean water, and you shall be cleansed from all your filthiness. 1. Cor. 6, after the Apostle had recounted the grievous sins of the Gentiles, he subjoins: And such indeed some of you were; but you are washed, but you are sanctified in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God. And 1. Ioan. 1, The blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanses us from all sin. And further: If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all iniquity; yet these divine oracles would by no means stand, nor would they have a genuine and true, but a fallacious signification, if the filth of sins were not utterly taken away and washed away in justification: therefore it must be acknowledged that this is so done. — The same truth stands equally evident from those very texts in which the just are called immaculate in the sight of God. Thus Psal. 118, Blessed are the undefiled in the way, who walk in the law of the Lord. Ephes. 1, He chose us, that we should be holy and unspotted in his sight. 2. Petri 3, Endeavor to be found before him immaculate and inviolate in peace. To which add that passage of Ephes. 5, Christ loved the Church, and delivered himself up for it, that he might sanctify it, cleansing it by the laver of water in the word of life, that he might present to himself a glorious Church not having spot or wrinkle, or any such thing. From these I argue thus: he who is cleansed, washed, and made whiter than snow, does not remain truly filthy, foul, black, and covered with dirt. Similarly he whose iniquities are blotted out, taken away, and cast into the depth of the sea is neither again ⟦illegible: OCR "tirdatur"; fortasse "tingitur"⟧ nor stained. Finally, he who is without spot and without wrinkle must not be said to be infected with the stain and filth of sin. Yet in justification the sinner is cleansed, washed, and made whiter than snow, and his sin is removed, blotted out, and cast forth as far as possible, so that he remains immaculate in the sight of God: therefore the sinner justified is no longer defiled by sins truly subsisting in him.

Proof secondly, from the authority of the holy Fathers: and especially of St. Cyprian, Epistle 2, which is to Donatus, where he calls baptism the death of crimes, the life of virtues; of St. Chrysostom, book 3 On the Priesthood, chapter 6: To purge the leprosy of the body, he says, or to speak more certainly, to show it purged, was permitted to the Priests of the Jews: but to our priests it has been wholly granted not, I say, to prove the leprosy of the body purged, but the stains of the soul to purge. And book 2 On the Compunction of the Heart: The compunction of the heart like fire consumes and destroys every vice of the soul, and whatever stain has crept into the heart it wipes away entirely, and deletes utterly. Hence in Homily 1 on the first Epistle to the Corinthians he compares the man absolved by the King from his crime with the accused who is absolved from his sins by baptism. And he adds that the former still keeps and retains a downcast spirit; but the latter, whom baptism has washed, does not so, but possesses a mind purer than the rays of the sun. — St. Jerome, book 3 against Pelagius, says: What of man? Shall you now be made clean in the laver? and is it said of you: Who is this that goes up washed, leaning upon her kinsman, so that indeed you may be washed, but cannot keep your purity unless you are sustained by the Lord. — Above all others, however, St. Augustine confirms this truth, especially in the books against the Pelagians, who calumniated the Catholic Prelates as if they asserted that Baptism does not give the indulgence of sins, nor take away crimes, so that the roots of all sins may be held in evil flesh. Thus he beats back that calumny in book 1 On the Merits of Sins, chapter 1: Who but an infidel would affirm this against the Pelagians? For we say that baptism gives the indulgence of all sins, and takes away crimes, not shaves them, nor holds the roots of all sins in evil flesh, as if sins were to be cut back like hairs on a shaved head, whence they might grow again: for I have found that they employ even that similitude for their calumny, as though this were our sentiment and our speech. And in book 3 he relates...

Proof finally, by theological reason: if sins were not utterly deleted in the justified, but truly subsisted in them, it would follow that the soul neither truly rises again from sin, nor is perfectly healed by the vivifying and medicinal grace of Christ: but that consequent is openly false, and it militates against those texts of Scripture in which the soul is said through justification to rise again from the death of sin, and to be healed: thus 1 John 5: We know that we have passed from death to life, because we love the brethren. From Psalm 30: Heal my soul, O Lord, for I have sinned against thee; for he would not rise from death who remained infected with mortal sin, nor would a member be called healthy whose wound were merely covered with a plaster: therefore, etc. It would follow, secondly, that the justified would nowhere enter the heavenly city, nor enter the kingdom of heaven, because there shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven anything defiled; for they ought not to be called clean, but stained, in whom the stain of mortal sin remains; since that stain could not be taken from them before death, in the judgment of the heretics; for it would be taken either by the act of faith which they would then elicit, or by death itself. Not the first, because it would follow that the justified prevented by sudden death are damned through defect of that act of faith, which they could not elicit. Nor can the second be asserted, since death, formally considered, being something natural, is altogether disproportionate to the stain of sin to be deleted. Finally, thirdly, it would follow that the justified still has something whereby he would be hateful to God, and to be condemned to eternal torments: but this is false, because, says the Apostle to the Romans 8: There is nothing of damnation to those who are in Christ Jesus: that is, says the Council of Trent, Session 5, Can. n, they who have been truly buried with Christ in baptism unto death: who have not walked according to the flesh, but putting off the old man, and putting on the new, which was created according to God, have been made innocent, immaculate, pure, harmless, and beloved of God: heirs indeed of God, but coheirs of Christ, so that nothing at all of...

They object, the Heretics. 1. All those texts of Scripture in which sins are said to be covered, and not imputed: thus Psalm 31 and Romans 4: Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered: blessed is the man to whom the Lord hath not imputed sin: where the three terms, to forgive, to cover, and not to impute, are set down to signify the same thing; so that one is explained by another: for sins to be forgiven by God, they say, is nothing else than to be so covered that they do not appear in the sight of God: and to be covered is nothing else than not to be imputed unto punishment and damnation, according to that of Ezekiel 33: If I say to the wicked, thou shalt surely die, and he doth penance for his sin, all his sins which he hath sinned shall not be imputed to him: in which sense the Apostle, 2 Corinthians 5, said: God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, not imputing to them their sins: therefore sins are not truly remitted in justification, but only covered. — I deny the consequence. For there is, as we said in the third Remarkable Point, a twofold covering of sins: one by which they are merely concealed, lest they appear: another by which they are cured, lest they remain. Now the aforesaid texts of Scripture are to be understood of the latter, not of the former. Hence St. Augustine in the preface to the aforesaid Psalm 31: Sins are covered, hidden, abolished: if God covers sins, he would not punish, he would not acknowledge, he chose rather to forgive. And afterwards he adds: Do not understand it so, that the said sins are covered as though there they exist and live, etc. — I answer 2. Gratuitously it is asserted that these words are placed to signify the same thing, and that one is explained by another: for they can be referred to diverse things, and signify distinct effects, of which the first augments the second, and the second the third, so that to forgive signifies only remission as regards fault and eternal punishment: but to cover denotes the abolishing of the memory of past sins, on account of acts of contrary virtues: finally, not to be imputed declares that they are not retained even as regards temporal punishment, but are so expunged and pardoned, that together with the guilt of fault, of the whole temporal...

They object, the Heretics. 2. That word of 1 Peter 4: Charity covereth a multitude of sins: therefore, since charity subsists, sins subsist, which are covered by it. Moreover that word of 1 John 1: if we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. Finally these words of the Lord's Prayer: Forgive us our debts. Upon which words St. Epiphanius says: How necessarily, how wholesomely are we admonished that we are sinners, who are compelled to pray for our sins, that while indulgence is asked of God, each should remember his own conscience: lest anyone please himself as though innocent, and hoping more by extolling himself, he is instructed and taught that he sins daily, while daily he is commanded to pray for his sins. Therefore there is none so acceptable, so holy, who is not infected with sins, and consequently sins are not deleted in justification, but covered. — I deny the consequence. And to the first text I say, its sense is not that charity covers the multitude of the sins of him in whom it is: but that charity, whereby we love our neighbor, covers the sins of our neighbor, that is, it brings it about that we dissemble, relieve, and pardon all his sins: but that this is the mind of the Apostle is clear from the preceding words, in which, addressing the faithful, he says: But above all things having continual mutual charity among yourselves. As also from what follows, saying: Using hospitality one towards another without murmuring, every one as he hath received grace ministering the same one towards another: which, as is evident, concern charity to be exercised toward our neighbor. To the second and third I say, those texts are to be understood of venial sins, which we said subsist with sanctifying grace in the Treatise On Grace.

You insist. Venial sins, by concession, subsist with sanctifying grace, nor do they prevent men from being just in any true and real sense, since surely such sins are not imputed to them; why therefore may not the same be said of graver sins, which we call mortal? — I answer, that the disparity is very great, in that venial sin is a very slight and imperfect stain, and in moral matters little is reckoned as nothing: hence it is no wonder that notwithstanding it, the just, who at times fall into it, are said still to be immaculate, that is, pure from grave stain, which alone is wont simply and absolutely to be called stain in the common manner of speaking, just as mortal sin alone is most frequently called absolutely sin in Scripture, as Romans 6: The wages of sin is death. James 1: Concupiscence, when it hath conceived, begetteth sin: but sin, when it is completed, begetteth death. Ezekiel 18: The soul that sinneth, the same shall die. Nor is it a wonder if notwithstanding venial sin they are named just: because venial sin, being a light offense, does not dissolve friendship with God, nor deprive one of his grace, and the infused habits of virtue, whereby the just is formally constituted, that is, pleasing to God, and habitually furnished to act well supernaturally in every kind of virtue. But the same cannot be said of mortal sin; for he is no less stained who is truly infected with some grave mortal sin, although it be not imputed in the Calvinist sense, that is, only covered and dissembled. Nor is he less unjust, both by actual injustice, because he sins equally, and also by habitual, because he equally merits to be deprived of the grace of God and the infused virtues, and is in fact deprived of them by God as judge, who established this general law, Ezekiel 18: The soul that sinneth, the same shall die. And verse 26: When the just man turneth himself away from his justice, and committeth iniquity, he shall die,

They object 4. In the justified man concupiscence always remains: but that is sin: therefore this subsists with sanctifying grace. — I answer, that concupiscence can be distinguished threefold, of which the first is the inclination to sin, which, although it is not formally sin, is nevertheless called by this name in the scriptures, because it is from sin, and inclines to sin, as the Council of Trent teaches, Session 5, Canon 5. The second is the inordinate motion, which anticipates reason and as it were casts over it the shadows of sin, that it may the more easily entice the will to sin, reason not resisting with its dictate. The third finally is the inordinate and free motion, whereby the will, agitated by the allurements and goads of concupiscence, gives assent to the forbidden thing. Concupiscence taken in the first and second manner can remain in a just man, seeing that it is not formally sin, but only entices to it; otherwise however of concupiscence taken in the third manner, especially when the forbidden thing, to which the will gives consent, is of great weight, such that that consent has the character of mortal sin.

They object 5. No one, however just, is exempted from sin unless he perfectly fulfills the precept of charity; for he who loves not remains in death: but from St. Augustine, book On the Perfection of Justice, chapter 8, the precept of charity is not perfectly fulfilled except in future glory: therefore every just man in this life is always vitiated by some sin. — I distinguish the minor: that precept shall not be fulfilled perfectly, that is, appreciatively:

I deny: that is, intensively, namely with that intensity and perfection wherewith God ought to be loved by a creature. I concede the minor, and deny the consequence. For although in this mortal life we are bound to love God with the whole soul, with the whole heart, and with all our strength; yet we are not bound to execute it according to every kind of intensity and perfection wherewith that love can be exercised by creatures according to their state; for it is certain, proportion preserved, that the virtue of the blessed is far more excellent than that of wayfarers. But by the force of that precept we are only bound to love God appreciatively, in such wise that we esteem him above all other lovable objects whatsoever: which certainly every just man fulfills, while he perseveres in justice and in the observance of the divine commandments.