Dist. 6, Part 1, Art. 1, Q. 5
by St. Bonaventure
Source text: Public Domain Mark 1.0. English translation/apparatus/encoding: CC BY-NC 4.0, Wroot Press.
https://bonaventure.wrootpress.com/browse/4/d/6/q/bon-sent-IV-d6-p1-a1-q5
----------------------------------------
### Question V. *Whether the character is imprinted deletably or indelibly.*

Fifthly it is asked whether the character is imprinted deletably or indelibly. And that it is imprinted *indelibly* seems to be the case:

1. Because the Sacraments in which the character is imprinted are in no way repeated; but if it were deleted, they could and should be repeated: therefore it is not deleted.

2. Likewise, the character stands together with *fault*, as is clear in a wicked priest, therefore it is not repugnant to fault; it stands also together with *ignorance*, as in a baptized infant, therefore it seems that it has no contrary by which it might be deleted; and it is in a perpetual subject: therefore its impression is indelible.

**On the contrary:**
1. It is possible for someone baptized to have the character of the beast, of which it is treated in Apocalypse, chapter fourteen; but no one can at once please God and the devil: therefore no one can at once have the sign of the one and of the other: therefore one character can delete and destroy the other.

2. Likewise, the character of the beast is deletable, because no one is so wicked that he cannot be made good: therefore by similarity the character of Christ [is deletable], since one who is good can be made wicked.

3. Likewise, if the character is indelible, I ask from what it has this. If from the efficient [cause]; but sanctifying grace is from God, and yet is deletable. If from the subject: then whatever is in the soul is indelible. Moreover, that it should rather be deletable by reason of the subject seems [right]: because it is received voluntarily; but what is subject to the will is variable: therefore etc.

4. Likewise, that it is deleted after this life seems [the case] in the Blessed: because it is *in part*, for the imperfect light is much more [so] than faith: therefore if faith falls away, so also does the character.

5. Likewise, that it is deleted in the damned seems [the case]: because the character in some way fits one for grace; but then they will be wholly unfit: therefore they will lack the character.

### Conclusion.

> **Conclusion.** The character is an indelible sign, because it is a habit impressed on a perpetual subject for the purpose of distinguishing.

**I respond:** It must be said that it is the common opinion that the character is an indelible property. But concerning the *cause* of this indelibility different [authors] hold differently.

For some say that, because the character is in the soul according to its *substance* or essence, and this is perpetual and invariable, therefore the character also [is so]. — But this was disproved above.

Others say that, because it is in the soul according to the *cognitive* power, which is not subject to variability as is the will — for we know certain things even with the will unwilling — therefore it is invariable. — But this does not hold, because through ignorance the cognitive habits are expelled, but not the character.

A third group says that, just as from the obligation of matrimony an insoluble bond is contracted as long as one lives, so likewise from the reception of a Sacrament: namely because there is there a certain *spiritual matrimony*; and since both God and the soul are things having a perpetual duration, therefore the character always endures. — But although this can be said of baptism, where there is a certain contracting of matrimony, yet not [so] in the other Sacraments.

And therefore it must be said otherwise, that the perpetuity of the character is taken principally from its *condition* and nature. — Whence it must be noted that there is an *innate* habit, and this is wholly indelible; and there is an *acquired* habit, and this, because it is from acquisition, can be lost; and there is an *infused* or given habit, and this is twofold. One is *given for directing*, and because the powers can be deflected, therefore it is deletable — for it can find a repugnance in the subject — and another [is] impressed for distinguishing, and to this the direction or deflection of the power is not repugnant. For if anything were repugnant, this alone would be the opposite consignation; but the opposite cannot be, because God alone can consign His own image: therefore, if it must be signed with an opposite sign, it will be done by God alone. But He never imprints a sign contrary to Himself; therefore it is necessary that the character persevere eternally. Since, therefore, the character is a property existing in a perpetual subject, in which it cannot have a repugnance, therefore its impression is perpetual.

**To the objections:**
*To 1 and 2.* To that which is objected concerning the character of the beast, it must be said that the character of the beast is not called some seal which the devil has impressed on the soul, but a fault perpetrated according to its will, in which the soul is disposed through obstinacy toward perpetuity; and therefore it is not entirely similar.

*To 3.* To that which is asked, from what it has this; it must be said that [it has it] from its *condition*, with the subject concurring, not being repugnant; and from the *efficient [cause]* not producing the contrary nor withdrawing [it].

*To 5.* To that which is objected concerning the damned, it must be said that in the damned it remains for confusion, in the Blessed for whatever degree of adornment.

*To 4.* As to what is objected, that it is *in part*; it must be said that the imperfection of the character is compatible with the perfection of glory; but it is not so with the imperfection of faith, because faith, insofar as it is a virtue, implies an enigma and the absence of the thing believed, and this is repugnant to the state of glory; and therefore it is voided, not insofar as it is light only, but insofar as it has annexed an enigma and the absence of the thing in itself, which is essential to faith insofar as it is a virtue; otherwise, if it saw with certitude, there would be no merit. But it is not so with the *character*, since it implies a certain consignation and a certain light; and this has no opposition to the perfect light nor has it opposition to the darkness of punishment on account of the smallness of its light: therefore it is neither voided there nor extinguished here .

---