Chapter 16 [XII.]—Victor Promises to the Unbaptized Paradise After Their Death, and the Kingdom of Heaven After Their Resurrection, Although He Admits that This Opposes Christ’s Statement.

But your friend, in comparison with what he has shown himself to be further on, thus far makes mistakes which one may somewhat tolerate. He apparently felt some disposition to relent; not, to be sure, at what he ought to have misgivings about, namely, for having ventured to assert that original sin is relaxed even in the case of the unbaptized, and that remission is given to them of all their sins, so that they are admitted into paradise, that is, to a place of great happiness, and possess a claim to the happy mansions in our Father’s house; but he seems to have entertained some regret at having conceded to them abodes of lesser blessedness outside the kingdom of heaven. Accordingly he goes on to say, “Or if any one is perhaps reluctant to believe that paradise is bestowed as a temporary and provisional gift on the soul of the thief or of Dinocrates (for there remains for them still, in the resurrection, the reward of the kingdom of heaven), although that principal passage stands in the way,75    Sententia illa principalis, in which principalis may mean either “principal,” “chief,” or “belonging to the Prince.”—‘Except a man be born again of water and of the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of God.’76    John iii. 5.—he may yet hold my assent as ungrudgingly given to this point; only let him magnify77    Or perhaps, “as simply amplifying both the effect and the purpose of,” etc., etc. both the aim and the effect of the divine compassion and fore-knowledge.” These words have I copied, as I read them in his second book. Well, now, could any one have shown on this erroneous point greater boldness, recklessness, or presumption? He actually quotes and calls attention to the Lord’s weighty sentence, encloses it in a statement of his own, and then says, “Although the opinion is opposed to the ‘principal passage,’ ‘Except a man be born again of water and of the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of God;’” he dares then to lift his haughty head in censure against the Prince’s judgment: “He may yet hold my assent as ungrudgingly given to this point;” and he explains his point to be, that the souls of unbaptized persons have a claim to paradise as a temporary gift; and in this class he mentions the dying thief and Dinocrates, as if he were prescribing, or rather prejudging, their destination; moreover, in the resurrection, he will have them transferred to a better provision, even making them receive the reward of the kingdom of heaven. “Although,” says he, “this is opposed to the sentence of the Prince.” Now, do you, my brother, I pray you, seriously consider this question: What sentence of the Prince shall that man deserve to have passed upon him, who imposes on any person an assent of his own which runs counter to the authority of the Prince Himself?

CAPUT XII.

16. Verumtamen iste in sui comparatione qualis posterius apparuit, tolerabilius adhuc errat. Nam velut poenituerit eum (non quod debuit poenitere, id est, quod ausus fuerit asserere non baptizatis relaxari originale peccatum, atque indulgentiam dari omnium peccatorum, ut in paradisum, hoc est, locum tantae felicitatis mittantur, et beatas mansiones in domo Patris habere mereantur); sed illud eum potius poenituerit, quod eis minoris beatitudinis extra regnum coelorum concesserit sedes; adjunxit, atque ait: «Aut si forte quispiam reluctetur, latronis animae vel Dinocratis interim temporarie collatum paradisum; nam superesse illis adhuc in resurrectione praemium regni coelorum: quanquam 0505 sententia illa principalis obsistat, Quia qui non renatus fuerit ex aqua et Spiritu sancto, non intrabit in regnum coelorum: tamen teneat etiam meum in hac parte non invidentis assensum, modo misericordiae praescientiaeque divinae et effectum amplificet et affectum.» Haec verba in secundo ejus libro lecta descripsi. Numquid in hac causa erroris audaciam, temeritatem, praesumptionem habere quispiam posset ampliorem? Ipse sententiam dominicam recordatur, ipse commemorat, ipse suis litteris interponit, ipse dicit, «quanquam sententia illa principalis obsistat, Quia qui non renatus fuerit ex aqua et Spiritu sancto, non intrabit in regnum coelorum;» et audet tamen suae censurae levare cervicem contra sententiam principalem! «Teneat,» inquit, «etiam meum non invidentis assensum:» qui dicit animas non baptizatorum temporarie mereri paradisum; propter has enim, latronem atque Dinocratem, tanquam praescribendo, vel potius praejudicando commemorat: in resurrectione autem in meliora transferri et regni coelorum percipere praemium: «quanquam sententia,» inquit, «principalis obsistat.» Jam ergo ipse considera, quaeso te, frater, quisquis cuipiam praebet assensum adversus auctoritatem sententiae principalis, quam sententiam merebitur principis?