_{Publisher’s note: This was machine translated using ChatGPT o3. An image of each section was compared to the google OCR in order to increase accuracy. I am by no means a Latinate. Any errors should be chalked up to the process. The original lecture can be found here, starting on page 203.}

“The sacrament of penance—its parts and its institution (as is clear from what was said above)—is followed by many matters which must now be discussed in order. For perfect doctrine requires this. From what we have said it is clear that there are keys in the Church: but what they are, and what acts belong to them, remains to be said—where excommunication and indulgences must be treated. It is also clear that, when guilt has been remitted, there often remains a penalty to be paid off; from which it follows likewise (as we will immediately show) that there is a purgatory and a necessity of suffrages for the dead; about which it is likewise proper to speak. The very subject-matter and order of doctrine demand all these things. The corruption of our times and the novelty of so great a doctrine demand it as well. Therefore, first let us speak together about purgatory and about suffrages; for these follow upon what we have just said concerning satisfaction.

Let this, then, be established for us as a most certain foundation of Catholic faith against all errors: Just as certain faith teaches that the souls of some, once released from the body, go straightway into eternal damnation, but those of others into perpetual happiness; so it holds that still others must first be purged and kept in certain hidden places, where by prayers, by the sacrifice of the altar, by alms, and by the pious works of the living they are helped, so that their purgation may be more quickly completed and they may pass over into eternal happiness.

The first two points which I assert here are proved by the most evident authorities of Scripture. Concerning damnation, that saying of the Gospel according to Luke is sufficient: “The rich man died and was buried in hell.” And although among many this text is punctuated otherwise—namely, so that we utter separately: “The rich man died and was buried”; and then what follows, “in hell,” is to be joined to what comes after in this way: “In hell he lifted up his eyes”—still, according to either reading of the text, the matter is sufficiently proved.

Similar to this is that passage of Job: “They spend their days in prosperity, and in a moment they go down to the underworld.” As for the second point, concerning perpetual happiness—although the opposite was the error of many Greeks—it is nevertheless sufficiently confirmed even by the same Evangelist, the Lord saying to the thief: “Today you will be with me in Paradise.” And what St. Paul, writing to the Corinthians, openly teaches: “Knowing that while we are in this body, we are absent from the Lord; yet we are confident, and we have a good will rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord.” There you plainly see that the souls of the perfect and of the saints, as soon as they depart from the body—which is before the final resurrection—are present with God; Christ also saying to his apostles: “I will come again and take you to myself, that where I am, you also may be.”

But concerning this error it is not necessary now to say more—namely, how one ought to answer by reasonings those arguments by which the Greeks confirm that error, and by which ours ought to be confirmed. It is enough that the Church has condemned it.

Now thirdly—what is our intention—about those means for the souls, namely, which need purgation, we must speak. In which we have at the same time affirmed two things, because they are joined together. For neither can stand without the other: namely, the purgation of souls after this life, and the suffrages by which they are aided by the living. These, therefore, sure dogmas of the Catholic faith are asserted by many Catholic doctors of our time and are confirmed by many authorities of Scripture and by reasons. But we, before we say anything about these, think that we must flee to the authority of the universal Church: it is manifest that this alone suffices for confirming all the dogmas of the faith, nor is there need now to prove it. For Christ says: “The gates of hell shall not prevail against her.” And Paul says: “[The Church] is the pillar and ground of the truth.” For which reason (as from the beginning, and afterwards frequently, we have warned—because adversaries also often say the contrary) Augustine teaches so fearlessly that whatever the whole Church, spread throughout the entire world in whatever lands, maintains, must be held with equal authority as that which is in Scripture.

Therefore, since the authority of the universal Church is so firm; concerning purgatory and the suffrages of the dead its tradition is so evident and certain, that by no other means could these things be proved more surely: we rightly said beforehand that one must flee first to her. For in confirming the faith and refuting heretics one must take care to lean upon solid foundations; so that, if at any time it should seem fitting to bring forward some doubtful or ambiguous things, they are strengthened by this firm truth (which perhaps sometimes ought to be done on account of diverse and weak intellects, since more often the less certain things convince certain minds more)—yet all are always to be plainly admonished that they must not rest upon those foundations, lest in this way the faith become contemptible and be exposed to the mockery of heretics). The most certain and most evident testimony, therefore, of purgatory and of suffrages is the authority of the universal Church, which always prays for the dead in the sacrifice of the altar and in many other offices instituted for that purpose, asking their deliverance from God—as all the doctors teach, and the councils of all nations from the very beginning of the Church: which there is no need to prove at length. Indeed Augustine, in the book On the Care to Be Taken for the Dead, immediately at the beginning—after bringing forward for this proof the authority from the book of the Maccabees (of which afterwards)—thus says: “But even if it were never read in the ancient Scriptures, the authority of the universal Church, which is evident in this custom, is not small: where, in the prayers of the priest which are poured out to the Lord at His altar, this commendation of the dead has its place.” And he confirms this very thing throughout that entire book. Likewise in the Enchiridion, and in the Confessions when speaking of his mother.

This very thing Ambrose openly confirms as something certain in the Church in the funeral orations for the Emperor Valentinian and for Theodosius, while he prays for them, and says that he will always pray and offer sacrifice for them.

This very thing Gregory the Great, with many miracles adduced, confirms in the fourth book of the Dialogues: namely, that the souls of the dead are helped by the prayers of the living and by sacrifices.

And that we may say something about the Greek doctors: John Damascene, in his own oration on this matter, in which he proves that the souls of the dead are helped by the prayers of many living persons, brings forward almost all the testimonies of the ancient Greeks, beginning with Dionysius the Areopagite. He, in the last chapter of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, concerning the rite of the Church regarding the dead, plainly says that the priest at the altar is to pray and entreat for them; he also adds the very words which the Church uses today in the commendation of the dead. There too he adduces the testimonies of Gregory Nazianzen, and of Gregory of Nyssa, of Chrysostom, and of many others; boldly asserting that this was handed down to the Church by the Apostles.

And finally Augustine, in the book On Heresies, reports the Arians as heretics, denying that one should pray for the dead. Bernard likewise, in Sermon 66 on the Canticles, reports others also as heretics, and warns that those are to be avoided who (he says) do not believe in purgatorial fire after death, but assert that the soul, once freed from the body, passes immediately either to rest or to damnation.

*Lest we omit this—there are very many ancient councils of almost all nations, in which many things are established about praying for the dead, as about a most certain matter. Thus the Third Council of Carthage, ch. 26, and the fourth, ch. 79, speak about the commendation of the dead, about offering sacrifice for them, and about oblations on their behalf; in which councils there is the agreement of all Africa. Likewise the Council of Vaison, ch. 2, expressly commands prayer for those who die by unforeseen accident. In like manner the Third Council of Toledo, ch. 22, and the Seventh, ch. 3, speak about burying bishops and religious with psalms and prayers. In which councils the agreement of the churches of Gaul and of Spain is also manifest. And at length, in the Council of Constance, the error of those denying purgatory is condemned. And in the Council of Florence, when the Greeks were uniting themselves to the Church, it is plainly handed down that purgatory is to be believed—about which they had erred many years before, as is shown in the little works of blessed Thomas against the errors of the Greeks, and against the Greeks, Armenians, and Saracens. Therefore all these things show both that purgatory has always been believed by the Church, and that prayers have always been offered therein for the dead, and sacrifices have been offered for them. Concerning which also Gratian cites the decree of the Council of Châlons, De consecratione dist. 1, cap. Visum praeterea, where it is prescribed that in the Mass a daily commemoration of the dead be made. Many other testimonies also of Gregory, Innocent, and other pontiffs he adduces.

_{*From this most certain foundation of the Church’s prayers for the dead, purgatory necessarily follows.}

For it is known that those prayers are not made by the Church for the damned, about whom certain faith holds that they cannot be saved (for Christ says: “Depart, into the eternal fire”); nor does the Church make them for the blessed either, for it is clear that they are not needed by them. Therefore the dead are “in the middle,” namely those who need purgation. Whence Augustine said in the aforesaid book, that for all the dead in the communion of the Church prayers ought to be made, because we are not able to discern who they are for whom they will be of profit. “It is better,” therefore (he says), “that they abound for those who have no need, than that they be lacking for those who do.” In vain, therefore, would the Church pray for the dead if there were no purgatory: which she herself acknowledges by her prayers. Nothing can be more evident than this proof; nor can even the adversaries deny it, but they resort to seeking from us testimonies of Scripture, which are either ambiguous, or can easily be perverted by them, at least according to appearance. But we, for our part, first oppose to them this authority; and if they deny it, they are deservedly to be mocked as those who seek the authority of Scripture.

For we shall say to them: whence does it stand that this Scripture is certain, if not through the authority of the Church, which they already deny? Surely, in matters of doubtful faith and in ambiguous senses of Scripture—as in receiving the sacred books themselves—the sole authority is that of the Church: those who refuse this show themselves alien from Christ and lovers of quarrels. Therefore they contradict not only faith itself, but every human reason and sense, when they are unwilling in controversies and doubts to have any judge other than their own opinion; while the Church, if they do not openly deny her, they so obscure that no certain judge is left in controversies.

The confirmation, therefore, of this dogma by the most certain authority of the Church having been made, it must now be briefly indicated by what scriptural authorities or by what reasons it can be proved, and how effective these are. Accordingly certain authorities of Scripture are brought forward by pious and learned men—whom we do not reprove (for perhaps they wish to begin from some common grounds)—which, however, are less plain and less effective, and prove less. Therefore we are not to use those for proving purgatory; but once it has been proved from other things, they can be expounded concerning it. That saying is brought forward: “The Lord kills and makes alive; he brings down to the underworld and brings up again.” As though from this it were proved either that there is a hell from which men are led forth, and thus purgatory. It does not prove it. And that saying of Paul: “At the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, on earth, and under the earth.” As though there it were proved that there is an underworld of the non‑damned—where knees are not bent to Christ—but purgatory. Likewise that passage of Zechariah: “You also, by the blood of your covenant, have sent forth your prisoners,” etc.—as though that ought to be understood of purgatory and not of the limbo of the fathers. All these, therefore, and similar things really prove nothing else than the boundless power of God and the efficacy of the passion of Christ everywhere, even in hell, diffusing itself and working—whatever at length that hell may be, whether of the damned or of the fathers, etc. Nevertheless, as we have said, they can be expounded of the fire of purgatory, provided it be established from elsewhere that it exists.

Other passages of Scripture are brought forward which are indeed more effective, but many of which have various senses and are thus ambiguous. Among these, that one seems more effective which is written in Matthew, Christ speaking about blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, that “it is not forgiven, neither in this age nor in the future.” From this place Augustine also, City of God 21, ch. 24, argues: “For it would not be said truthfully of certain persons that it is not forgiven them neither in this age nor in the future, unless there were those to whom, if not in this, yet it would be forgiven in the future.” And Gregory, Morals IV, ch. 39, argues in the same way. So too Bernard, in the aforementioned sermon on the Canticle. Therefore, for the disciplined and consenting this passage ought deservedly to suffice. Yet because that passage rather presupposes this than asserts it—if it were not proved from elsewhere—one could answer what heretics now answer: namely, that it was said according to a certain exaggeration and hyperbole. Wherefore, just as it is not necessary, so neither do we think it opportune to rely on this authority.

The second authority that is adduced is from Paul: “The work of each shall be proved by fire. If anyone’s work remains which he has built upon, he shall receive a reward; if anyone’s work burns, he shall suffer loss, but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire.” For the Apostle had first said that Christ is the foundation, and that upon it some build with wood, hay, and stubble; but others with gold, silver, and precious stones. And he had said: “The work of each will be made manifest.

“For the day of the Lord will declare it, because it will be revealed in fire.” These words certainly contain many things pertinent to proving this: namely, that there are works worthy indeed of burning and of fire, by which, however, the doer is not hindered from salvation. For he says that these works will burn, and the doer will suffer loss; then that this man is to be saved through fire: “He shall be saved,” he says. From these it either seems to be inferred, or openly asserted, that there is a purgatorial fire. Inferred, I say, because one may rightly ask: if someone departs from this world with those works, is he not to be purged by fire? But many hold that purgatory is openly asserted there, because, he says, “the day of the Lord will reveal it.” For in Sacred Scripture the “day of the Lord” is not usually said except of the day of the universal or particular judgment. Although therefore these things seem to have such force, yet since Augustine in the Enchiridion and in book 21 of the City of God judges that these words are rather to be expounded of the tribulation of this life—and surely not without the most effective reason (as Gregory in the aforesaid place of the Dialogues, ch. 16, follows)—this is enough that at least that passage be ambiguous and have several senses. Wherefore it is neither effective nor certain for confirming doubts of faith. For Augustine rightly urges in those places that it ought not to be understood of purgatory after this life: because the fire, he says, of which Paul there spoke, must be understood such that both pass through it—that is, both he who builds with wood, etc., and he who builds with silver, gold, etc. Wherefore, since in the future those are not to be purged who build with gold, it remains that it be understood of tribulation; of which is that saying: “The furnace tests the vessels of the potter, and the trial of tribulation [tests] just men.” “You have come,” he says, “to the tribulations which The potter’s furnace tests the vessels; and the trial of tribulation [tests] just men.”

“When,” he says, “the tribulation comes in which it is necessary to lose temporal things, the one who had built upon the foundation with wood, etc.—that is, who had loved those things too much, though with charity— is tormented in their loss, and by that penalty is purged. But the one who had possessed these temporal things in such a way that he nevertheless built with gold and precious stones—that is, who loved not those things but the heavenly things—suffers no loss or torment; rather that tribulation becomes for him an increase of his crown. In which tribulation,” he says, “both the very death of the flesh can be understood, and the persecutions of the Church by which the martyrs were crowned, and also that tribulation which will be at the end under Antichrist.” Therefore this reasoning certainly proves most effectively that purgatory after death is not proved there; or, if to someone it seems that it can nevertheless be proved, surely because of the ambiguity of the senses it is less evident. Wherefore one must not rely on it. The ambiguous sense of a passage of Scripture (as is clear from Augustine himself, On Christian Doctrine, book 3) must be confirmed from certain dogmas of faith, not dogmas of faith from it.

Lastly, the passage is from the second book of the Maccabees, about Judas Maccabeus, who took care that offerings be made for the dead, where it is added: “It is a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead.” This is certainly sufficiently manifest. But because there was doubt among the ancients about the authority of that book—namely, whether it is canonical—which in Augustine’s time did not seem sufficiently explained (for he says in book 2 Against the Letter of Gaudentius that that book was received by the Church because of certain remarkable martyrdoms—“if, however,” he says, “it be read soberly”; which he says on account of the death of Razias, which was indeed brave, but not in conformity with Christian doctrine, nor certainly with natural reason, for he killed himself)—although, therefore, this doubt about the authority of that book seems to have been removed after Augustine by many councils, in which it is counted among the canonical books, nevertheless books about which there has been doubt, even if afterwards they are received, are not for that reason of equal authority with those about which there was never any doubt. We therefore judge this dogma of purgatory and of suffrages for the dead to be more certain and evident than is the authority of that book; for less has been doubted about these dogmas than about its authority. There is no reason, therefore, why we should confirm things more evident by things less evident.

Therefore let these scriptural authorities be brought forward in their own place—yet in such a way that the heretics understand on what we chiefly rely. In this matter, then, the authority of the Church is to be preferred by us before the rest—

—to be preferred, not because it is greater than Scripture (about which we are not speaking now), but because it is more evident in this point.

From these things, then, we have first how certain and evident this faith of purgatory is in the Church, and how it has always been. From which we think (saving the judgment of the more prudent) that it must necessarily be inferred that this faith is not to be passed over in silence by Catholic doctors when they dispute against heretics and hand on Catholic teaching. There is no lack of those who, for love of peace and for the sake of avoiding scandal—since these things are hateful to heretics—think they should be kept quiet. But we, since the whole Church has always taught this so openly, think it must necessarily be confessed and taught, lest we be guilty before God of omitting the confession of necessary faith and doctrine. If, in time of persecution, he who is ashamed to confess Christ is guilty, so too is he who keeps silence when a point of faith—when a most certain dogma of the Church—is attacked by adversaries. Surely Catholics are not permitted to be silent and to allow the true doctrine of faith to be suppressed. It is human wisdom to be ashamed of Christ and of his words—especially when no one from heresy is to be admitted into the Church unless he has in particular revoked the errors he previously followed. Therefore both the truth of faith and the salvation of souls require that this be taught openly. The heretics are unwilling to be silent; why then should Catholics be silent? Let these things, then, suffice for the confirmation of purgatory. It remains to answer the arguments of the adversaries, which will be done briefly in the following lesson.