Probatio resurrectionis a sanctis
Proof of resurrection from the saints
15:29 Alioquin quid facient qui baptizantur pro mortuis, si omnino mortui non resurgunt? ut quid et baptizantur pro illis? [n. 951]
15:29 Otherwise, what shall they do who are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not again at all? Why are they then baptized for them? [n. 951]
15:30 ut quid et nos periclitamur omni hora? [n. 955]
15:30 Why also are we in danger every hour? [n. 955]
15:31 Quotidie morior per vestram gloriam, fratres, quam habeo in Christo Jesu Domino nostro. [n. 957]
15:31 I die daily, by your glory, brethren, which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord. [n. 957]
15:32 Si secundum hominem ad bestias pugnavi Ephesi, quid mihi prodest, si mortui non resurgunt? Manducemus, et bibamus, cras enim moriemur. [n. 959]
15:32 If (according to man) I fought with beasts at Ephesus, what does it profit me, if the dead rise not again? Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we shall die. [n. 959]
15:33 Nolite seduci: corrumpunt mores bonos colloquia mala. [n. 961]
15:33 Do not be seduced: evil communications corrupt good manners. [n. 961]
15:34 Evigilate justi, et nolite peccare: ignorantiam enim Dei quidam habent, ad reverentiam vobis loquor. [n. 963]
15:34 Awake, you just, and sin not. For some have not the knowledge of God. I speak it to your shame. [n. 963]
951. Ostensa resurrectione mortuorum ex resurrectione Christi, hic consequenter ostendit resurrectionem mortuorum ex vita sanctorum. Et circa hoc duo facit.
951. Having shown the resurrection of the dead from the resurrection of Christ, the Apostle then shows the resurrection of the dead from the life of the saints. In regard to this he does two things:
Primo probat propositum;
first, he proves his proposition;
secundo subiungit admonitionem, ibi nolite seduci, et cetera.
second, he adds an admonition, at do not be seduced.
Probat autem propositum, ducendo ad tria inconvenientia.
He proves his proposition by leading to three incongruities:
Primum inconveniens est quod frustraretur devotio hominum ad baptismum;
first, it is incongruous that men’s devotion to baptism be frustrated;
secundum est quod frustraretur labor sanctorum, et hoc ponit ibi ut quid et nos periclitamur, etc.;
second, that the laborers of the saints would be frustrated, at why also are we in danger;
tertium est quod daretur occasio fruendi voluptatibus. Et hoc ponit, ibi manducemus et bibamus, et cetera.
third, that there would be given the occasion to enjoy pleasure, at let us eat and drink.
Circa primum duo facit.
In regard to the first he does two things:
Primo ponit primum inconveniens;
first, he presents the first incongruity;
secundo explicat illud, ibi si omnino mortui, et cetera.
second, he explains it, at if the dead rise not again at all.
952. Dicit ergo primo: dixi quod mortui resurgunt, alioquin, scilicet si non est resurrectio mortuorum futura, ut nos praedicamus, quid facient qui, et cetera. Hoc potest dupliciter intelligi.
952. First, therefore, he says: I have said that the dead rise, otherwise, namely, if there is not resurrection of the dead, as we preach, what shall they do who are baptized for the dead. This can be understood in two ways:
Uno modo, ut per hoc quod dicit mortui, intelligantur opera peccati, quae sunt mortua, quia carent vita gratiae, et ducunt ad mortem. Hebr. IX, 14: sanguis Christi emundabit, et cetera. Et secundum hoc plana est littera. Quid, scilicet facient illi, qui baptizantur pro mortuis, id est pro peccatis abluendis, si non sint vitam gratiae habituri?
in one way so that by dead the works of sin are understood. They are dead, because they lack the life of grace and lead to death: the blood of Christ will purify your conscience from dead works (Heb 9:14). And according to this the words are plain. What shall they do who are baptized for the dead? i.e., for washing away their sins, if they are not to have the life of grace?
Alio modo, quia quidam tunc temporis volebant, quod homines possent primo baptizari, ut sibi ipsis remissionem peccatorum consequerentur; et iterum baptizabantur pro aliquo consanguineo suo defuncto, ut etiam post mortem dimitterentur ei peccata. Et secundum hoc sit littera: quid facient qui baptizantur pro mortuis, scilicet consanguineis, pro quorum salute baptizantur, si non sit resurrectio mortuorum? Sed isti in aliquo commendari possunt, scilicet in hoc quod fidem resurrectionis videbantur habere. Sed in aliquo possunt reprehendi, in hoc scilicet quod unum credebant posse pro alio baptizari.
In another way, because some at that time wanted men to be baptized: first, in order that they might obtain for themselves the remission of sins; and they were baptized again for some dead relative, so that he too would be freed from sins after death. And according to this the text reads: what shall they do who are baptized for the dead, namely, their relatives, for whose salvation they were baptized, if there is no resurrection of the dead. But they can be commended in something, namely, in the fact that they seemed to have faith in the resurrection. But in something they can be reprehended, in the fact that they believed that one can be baptized for another.
953. Sed tunc est quaestio: si oratio unius prodest alteri, quare non etiam baptismus?
953. But then there is a question: if one’s prayers profit another, why not his baptism?
Ad hoc est duplex responsio. Una est, quod opera quae faciunt vivi, prosunt mortuis propter unionem caritatis et fidei. Et ideo non prosunt nisi illis qui decedunt cum caritate et fide. Unde infidelibus nec oratio, nec baptismus vivorum prosunt; tamen oratio prodest illis qui sunt in purgatorio.
To this there are two answers: one is that works performed by the living do profit the dead on account of the union of charity and faith. And therefore, they benefit only those who die with charity and faith. Hence, neither prayer nor the baptism of the living profit unbelievers; yet prayer can help those in purgatory.
Alia responsio, et melior, quia bona opera valent mortuis, non solum ex vi caritatis, sed etiam ex intentione facientis. Sicut si ego dicerem psalterium pro aliquo qui est in purgatorio, qui tenebatur dicere, ut satisfaciam pro eo, valet quidem quantum ad satisfactionem solum illi pro quo dico.
Another answer and better is that good works help the dead not only in virtue of charity but also from the intention of the one who performs them. Just as if I should say the psalter for someone who is in purgatory and was bound to say it to satisfy for him, it will be profitable indeed as to satisfying only for the one for whom I say it.
Dicendum est ergo secundum hoc, quod baptismus non habet virtutem ex intentione nostra, sed ex intentione Christi. Intentio autem Christi est ut baptismus illis proficiat, qui in Christi fide baptizantur.
It must be said according to this that baptism has no value from our intention but from the intention of Christ. But the intention of Christ is that baptism should benefit those who are baptized in the faith of Christ.
954. Consequenter istud inconveniens explicat, dicens si omnino, et cetera. Et ista explicatio videtur magis convenire secundae expositioni supra positae, quasi dicat: ut quid baptizantur pro illis, id est, pro mortuis, si non resurgunt?
954. Then he explains that incongruity, saying: if the dead rise not again at all. And this explanation seems to agree more with the second explanation given above. As if to say: why are they baptized for them, i.e., for the dead, if they do not rise.
Sed si secundum primam expositionem exponatur, tunc sic potest dici si omnino mortui non resurgunt, ut quid etiam baptizantur pro illis, id est pro peccatis, cum ipsa non dimittantur?
But if it is explained according to the first explanation, then it can be said: if the dead rise not again at all, why are they then baptized for them, i.e., for their sins, since they are not forgiven.
955. Ut quid periclitamur, et cetera. Hic ponit secundum inconveniens, et circa hoc duo facit.
955. Why also are we in danger every hour? Here he presents the second incongruity. In regard to this he does two things:
Primo ponit inconveniens in communi;
first, he mentions the incongruity in general;
secundo in speciali, ibi quotidie, et cetera.
second, in special, at I die daily.
956. Dicit ergo: non solum frustra baptizantur aliqui pro remissione peccatorum, sed nos etiam frustra affligimur, si resurrectio mortuorum non est. Et hoc est quod dicit ut quid et nos, sancti apostoli, periclitamur, id est pericula patimur, omni hora? II Cor. c. XI, 26: periculis fluminum, periculis, et cetera.
956. He says, therefore: not only are some baptized in vain for the remission of sins, but we also are afflicted in vain, if there is no resurrection of the dead. And this is what he says: why also are we, the holy apostles, in danger, i.e., endure dangers, every hour: in danger at sea, in danger from false brethren (2 Cor 11:26).
Constat enim, quod sancti exponunt se tribulationibus, et affligunt seipsos propter spem vitae aeternae, secundum illud Rom. V, 11: non solum autem, sed et gloriamur, et cetera. Spes autem non confundit, et cetera. Si ergo resurrectio mortuorum non sit, totaliter spes perit. Frustra ergo affligerent se, si mortui non resurgunt.
For it is clear that the saints expose themselves to tribulation and afflict themselves on account of the hope of eternal life, as it says in Romans: not only so, but we also rejoice in God through the Lord Jesus Christ (Rom 5:11). Hope does not confound (Rom 5:5). Therefore, if there no resurrection of the dead, hope utterly vanishes. Therefore, they have afflicted themselves in vain, if there is no resurrection.
Nec obstat, si dicatur quod anima separata praemiatur, quia, ut probatum est supra, non posset probari quod anima esset immortalis.
Nor is that conclusion hindered by saying that the separated soul will be rewarded, because, as has been proved above, it cannot be proved that the soul would be immortal.
957. Consequenter cum dicit quotidie, etc., enumerat pericula in speciali, et
957. Then when he says: daily I die for your glory, he enumerates the dangers in special:
primo quantum ad personam;
first, as to the person;
secundo quantum ad locum, ibi si, secundum hominem, ad bestias, et cetera.
second, as to the place, at if (according to man) I fought with beasts at Ephesus.