Chapter XXII.
73. But the question before us is rendered more urgent by what the Apostle John says: “If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and the Lord shall give him life for him who sinneth not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.”213 1 John v. 16. For he manifestly shows that there are certain brethren for whom we are not commanded to pray, although the Lord bids us pray even for our persecutors. Nor can the question in hand be solved, unless we acknowledge that there are certain sins in brethren which are more heinous than the persecution of enemies. Moreover, that brethren mean Christians can be proved by many examples from the divine Scriptures. Yet that one is plainest which the apostle thus states: “For the unbelieving husband is sanctified in the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified in the brother.”214 See note p. For he has not added the word our; but has thought it plain, as he wished a Christian who had an unbelieving wife to be understood by the expression brother. And therefore he says a little after, “But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart: a brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases.”215 1 Cor. vii. 14, 15. Hence I am of opinion that the sin of a brother is unto death, when any one, after coming to the knowledge of God through the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, makes an assault on the brotherhood, and is impelled by the fires of envy to oppose that grace itself by which he is reconciled to God. But the sin is not unto death, if any one has not withdrawn his love from a brother, but through some infirmity of disposition has failed to perform the incumbent duties of brotherhood. And on this account our Lord also on the cross says, “Father, forgive216 Ignosce; Vulgate, dimitte. them; for they know not what they do:”217 Luke xxiii. 34.for, not yet having become partakers of the grace of the Holy Spirit, they had not yet entered the fellowship of the holy brotherhood. And the blessed Stephen in the Acts of the Apostles prays for those by whom he is being stoned,218 Acts vii. 60. because they had not yet believed on Christ, and were not fighting against that common grace. And the Apostle Paul on this account, I believe, does not pray for Alexander, because he was already a brother, and had sinned unto death, viz. by making an assault on the brotherhood through envy. But for those who had not broken off their love, but had given way through fear, he prays that they may be pardoned. For thus he expresses it: “Alexander the coppersmith did me much evil: the Lord will reward him according to his works. Of whom be thou ware also; for he hath greatly withstood our words.”219 Sermonibus; Vulgate, verbis. Then he adds for whom he prays, thus expressing it: “At my first defence no man stood with me, but all men forsook me: I pray God that it may not be laid to their charge.”220 2 Tim. iv. 14–16.
74. It is this difference in their sins which separates Judas the betrayer from Peter the denier: not that a penitent is not to be pardoned, for we must not come into collision with that declaration of our Lord, where He enjoins that a brother is to be pardoned, when he asks his brother to pardon him;221 Matt. xviii. 21. Luke xvii. 3. but that the ruin connected with that sin is so great, that he cannot endure the humiliation of asking for it, even if he should be compelled by a bad conscience both to acknowledge and divulge his sin. For when Judas had said, “I have sinned, in that I have betrayed the innocent blood,” yet it was easier for him in despair to run and hang himself,222 Matt. xxvii. 4, 5. than in humility to ask for pardon. And therefore it is of much consequence to know what sort of repentance God pardons. For many much more readily confess that they have sinned, and are so angry with themselves that they vehemently wish they had not sinned; but yet they do not condescend to humble the heart and to make it contrite, and to implore pardon: and this disposition of mind we must suppose them to have, as feeling themselves already condemned because of the greatness of their sin.
75. And this is perhaps the sin against the Holy Ghost, i.e. through malice and envy to act in opposition to brotherly love after receiving the grace of the Holy Ghost,—a sin which our Lord says is not forgiven either in this world or in the world to come. And hence it may be asked whether the Jews sinned against the Holy Ghost, when they said that our Lord was casting out devils by Beelzebub, the prince of the devils: whether we are to understand this as said against our Lord Himself, because He says of Himself in another passage, “If they have called the Master of the house Beelzebub, how much more shall they call them of His household!”223 Matt. x. 25. or whether, inasmuch as they had spoken from great envy, being ungrateful for so manifest benefits, although they were not yet Christians, they are, from the very greatness of their envy, to be supposed to have sinned against the Holy Ghost? This latter is certainly not to be gathered from our Lord’s words. For although He has said in the same passage, “And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him; but whosoever speaketh a word against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come;” yet it may seem that He admonished them for this purpose, that they should come to His grace, and after accepting of it should not so sin as they have now sinned. For now they have spoken a word against the Son of man, and it may be forgiven them, if they be converted, and believe on Him, and receive the Holy Ghost; but if, after receiving Him, they should choose to envy the brotherhood, and to assail the grace they have received, it cannot be forgiven them, neither in this world nor in the world to come. For if He reckoned them so condemned, that there was no hope left for them, He would not judge that they ought still to be admonished, as He did by adding the statement, “Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt.”224 Matt. xii. 24–33.
76. Let it be understood, therefore, that we are to love our enemies, and to do good to those who hate us, and to pray for those who persecute us, in such a way, that it is at the same time understood that there are certain sins of brethren for which we are not commanded to pray; lest, through unskilfulness on our part, divine Scripture should seem to contradict itself (a thing which cannot happen). But whether, as we are not to pray for certain parties, so we are also to pray against some, has not yet become sufficiently evident. For it is said in general, “Bless, and curse not;” and again, “Recompense to no man evil for evil.”225 Rom. xii. 14, 17. Moreover, while you do not pray for one, you do not therefore pray against him: for you may see that his punishment is certain, and his salvation altogether hopeless; and you do not pray for him, not because you hate him, but because you feel you can profit him nothing, and you do not wish your prayer to be rejected by the most righteous Judge. But what are we to think respecting those parties against whom we have it revealed that prayers were offered by the saints, not that they might be turned from their error (for in this way prayer is offered rather for them), but that final condemnation might come upon them: not as it was offered against the betrayer of our Lord by the prophet; for that, as has been said, was a prediction of things to come, not a wish for punishment: nor as it was offered by the apostle against Alexander; for respecting that also enough has been already said: but as we read in the Apocalypse of John of the martyrs praying that they may be avenged;226 Rev. vi. 10. while the well-known first martyr prayed that those who stoned him should be pardoned.
77. But we need not be moved by this circumstance. For who would venture to affirm, in regard to those white-robed saints, when they pleaded that they should be avenged, whether they pleaded against the men themselves or against the dominion of sin? For of itself it is a genuine avenging of the martyrs, and one full of righteousness and mercy, that the dominion of sin should be overthrown, under which dominion they were subjected to so great sufferings. And for its overthrow the apostle strives, saying, “Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body.”227 Rom. vi. 12. But the dominion of sin is destroyed and overthrown, partly by the amendment of men, so that the flesh is brought under subjection to the spirit; partly by the condemnation of those who persevere in sin, so that they are righteously disposed of in such a way that they cannot be troublesome to the righteous who reign with Christ. Look at the Apostle Paul; does it not seem to you that he avenges the martyr Stephen in his own person, when he says: “So fight I, not as one that beateth the air: but I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection”?228 1 Cor. ix. 26, 27. Sevituti subjicio; Vulgate, in servitutem redigo. For he was certainly laying prostrate, and weakening, and bringing into subjection, and regulating that principle in himself whence he had persecuted Stephen and the other Christians. Who then can demonstrate that the holy martyrs were not asking from the Lord such an avenging of themselves, when at the same time, in order to their being avenged, they might lawfully wish for the end of this world, in which they had endured such martyrdoms? And they who pray for this, on the one hand pray for their enemies who are curable, and on the other hand do not pray against those who have chosen to be incurable: because God also, in punishing them, is not a malevolent Torturer, but a most righteous Disposer. Without any hesitation, therefore, let us love our enemies, let us do good to those that hate us, and let us pray for those who persecute us.
CAPUT XXII.---73. Sed illud magis urget istam quaestionem, quod dicit apostolus Joannes, Si quis scit peccare fratrem suum peccatum non ad mortem, postulabit, et dabit illi Dominus vitam qui peccat non ad mortem: est autem peccatum ad mortem; non pro illo dico ut roget (I Joan. V, 16). Aperte enim ostendit 1266 esse quosdam fratres pro quibus orare non nobis praecipitur, cum Dominus etiam pro persecutoribus nostris orare jubeat. Nec ista quaestio solvi potest, nisi fateamur esse aliqua peccata in fratribus, quae inimicorum persecutione graviora sint. Fratres autem Christianos significare, multis divinarum Scripturarum documentis probari potest. Manifestissimum tamen illud est, quod Apostolus ita ponit, Sanctificatus est enim vir infidelis in uxore, et sanctificata est mulier infidelis in fratre. Non enim addidit, nostro; sed manifestum existimavit, cum fratris nomine christianum intelligi voluit, qui infidelem haberet uxorem. Et ideo paulo post dicit, Quod si infidelis discedit, discedat: non autem servituti subjectus est frater vel soror in hujusmodi (I Cor. VII, 14, 15). Peccatum ergo fratris ad mortem puto esse, cum post agnitionem Dei per gratiam Domini nostri Jesu Christi quisque oppugnat fraternitatem, et adversus ipsam gratiam, qua reconciliatus est Deo, invidentiae facibus agitatur . Peccatum autem non ad mortem est, si quisquam non amorem a fratre alienaverit, sed officia fraternitatis debita per aliquam infirmitatem animi non exhibuerit. Quapropter et Dominus in cruce ait, Pater, ignosce illis, quia nesciunt quid faciunt (Luc. XXIII, 34): nondum enim gratiae Spiritus sancti participes facti societatem sanctae fraternitatis inierant. Et beatus Stephanus in Actibus Apostolorum orat pro eis a quibus lapidatur (Act. VII, 59); quia nondum Christo crediderant, neque adversus illam communem gratiam dimicabant. Et apostolus Paulus propterea, credo, non orat pro Alexandro, quia jam frater erat, et ad mortem, id est, invidentia fraternitatem oppugnando, peccaverat. Pro his autem qui non abruperant, amorem , sed timore succubuerant, orat ut eis ignoscatur. Sic enim dicit: Alexander aerarius multa mihi mala ostendit; reddet illi Dominus secundum opera ejus: quem et tu devita; valde enim restitit nostris sermonibus. Deinde subjungit pro quibus orat, ita dicens: In prima mea defensione nemo mihi affuit, sed omnes me dereliquerunt: non illis imputetur (II Tim. IV, 14-16).
74. Ista differentia peccatorum Judam tradentem a Petro negante distinguit: non quia poenitenti non sit ignoscendum, ne contra illam sententiam Domini veniamus, qua praecipit semper ignoscendum esse fratri petenti ut sibi frater ignoscat (Luc. XVII, 3): sed quia illius peccati tanta labes est, ut deprecandi humilitatem subire non possit, etiam si peccatum suum mala conscientia et agnoscere et enuntiare cogatur. Cum enim dixisset Judas, Peccavi, quod tradiderim sanguinem justum; facilius tamen desperatione cucurrit ad laqueum (Matth. XXVII, 4, 5), quam humilitate veniam deprecatus est. Quapropter multum interest quali poenitentiae ignoscat Deus. Multi enim multo citius se fatentur peccasse, atque ita sibi succensent ut vehementer se peccasse nollent; sed tamen 1267 animum ad humiliandum et obterendum cor, implorandamque veniam non deponunt: quam mentis affectionem, propter peccati magnitudinem, jam de damnatione illos habere credendum est.
75. Et hoc est fortasse peccare in Spiritum sanctum, id est, per malitiam et invidiam, fraternam oppugnare charitatem post acceptam gratiam Spiritus sancti, quod peccatum Dominus neque hic, neque in futuro saeculo dimitti dicit. Unde quaeri potest utrum in Spiritum sanctum Judaei peccaverint, quando dixerunt quod in Beelzebub principe daemoniorum daemonia Dominus expelleret: utrum hoc in ipsum Dominum dictum accipiamus, quia de se dicit alio loco, Si enim patrem familias Beelzebub vocaverunt, quanto magis domesticos ejus (Matth. X, 25)? An quoniam de magna invidentia dixerant, ingrati tam praesentibus beneficiis, quamvis nondum christiani fuerint, tamen propter ipsam invidentiae magnitudinem in Spiritum sanctum peccasse credendi sunt? Non enim hoc colligitur de verbis Domini. Quamvis enim eodem loco dixerit, «Quicumque enim dixerit verbum nequam adversus Filium hominis, remittetur ei: qui autem dixerit verbum adversus Spiritum sanctum, non remittetur ei, neque in hoc saeculo, neque in futuro;» tamen videri potest ad hoc eos monuisse, ut accedant ad gratiam, et post acceptam gratiam non ita peccent, ut nunc peccaverunt. Nunc enim in Filium hominis dixerunt verbum nequam, et potest eis dimitti, si conversi fuerint, et ei crediderint, et Spiritum sanctum acceperint: quo accepto si fraternitati invidere, et gratiam quam acceperunt oppugnare voluerint, non eis dimitti, neque in hoc saeculo neque in futuro. Nam si eos sic haberet condemnatos, ut nulla spes illis reliqua esset, non adhuc monendos judicaret, cum addidit dicens: Aut facite arborem bonam, et fructum ejus bonum: aut facite arborem malam, et fructum ejus malum (Id. XII, 24-33).
76. Sic itaque accipiatur diligendos inimicos esse, et benefaciendum his qui nos oderunt, et orandum pro his qui nos persequuntur, ut pro quibusdam etiam fratrum peccatis intelligatur non praeceptum esse ut oremus; ne per imperitiam nostram divina Scriptura (quod fieri non potest) a se dissentire videatur. Sed utrum sicut pro quibusdam non est orandum, ita etiam contra aliquos orandum sit, nondum satis apparuit. Generaliter enim dictum est, Benedicite, et nolite maledicere: et illud, Nemini malum pro malo reddentes (Rom. XII, 14, 17). Pro quo autem non oras, non etiam contra illum oras: potes enim videre certam ejus poenam, et penitus desperatam salutem, et non quia odisti eum, ideo pro illo non oras; sed quia sentis nihil te posse proficere, et orationem tuam non vis repelli a justissimo judice. Sed quid agimus de his contra quos oratum a sanctis accepimus, non ut corrigerentur, nam hoc modo potius pro ipsis oratum est; sed ad illam ultimam damnationem: non sicut contra Domini traditorem per prophetam; nam illa, ut dictum est, praedictio futurorum, non optatio supplicii fuit: nec sicut ab Apostolo contra Alexandrum; 1268 nam et inde jam satis dictum est: sed sicut in Apocalypsi Joannis legimus martyres orare ut vindicentur (Apoc. VI, 10); cum ille primus martyr ut lapidatoribus suis ignosceretur, oraverit.
77. Sed hinc non oportet moveri. Quis enim audeat affirmare, cum illi sancti candidati se vindicari petierint, utrum contra ipsos homines, an contra regnum peccati petierint? Nam ipsa est sincera et plena justitiae et misericordiae vindicta martyrum, ut evertatur regnum peccati, quo regnante tanta perpessi sunt. Ad cujus eversionem nititur Apostolus, dicens: Non ergo regnet peccatum in vestro mortali corpore (Rom. VI, 12). Destruitur autem et evertitur peccati regnum, partim correctione hominum, ut caro spiritui subjiciatur; partim damnatione perseverantium in peccato, ut ita justitia ordinentur, ut justis cum Christo regnantibus molesti esse non possint. Intuere apostolum Paulum; nonne tibi videtur in seipso Stephanum martyrem vindicare, cum dicit: Non sic pugno, tanquam aerem caedens; sed castigo corpus meum, et servituti subjicio (I Cor. IX, 26, 27)? Nam hoc in se utique prosternebat, et debilitabat, et victum ordinabat, unde Stephanum caeterosque Christianos fuerat persecutus. Quis ergo convincit martyres sanctos non talem suam vindictam a Domino esse deprecatos, cum etiam finem hujus saeculi, in quo tanta exitia pertulerunt, ad suam vindictam potuerint licenter optare? Quod qui orant, et pro inimicis suis orant qui sanabiles sunt, et contra illos non orant qui insanabiles esse voluerunt: quia Deus quoque puniendo illos non est malevolus tortor, sed justissimus ordinator. Sine ulla ergo dubitatione diligamus inimicos nostros, benefaciamus his qui oderunt nos, et oremus pro eis qui nos persequuntur.