Palladium theologicum, Tomus quintus: De virtutibus
Gaudenzio da Brescia (1612–1672)
Reuerendi patris Gaudentij Bontempi, ... Palladium theologicum, seu Tota theologia scholastica in septem tomos distributa. Ad intimam mentem d. Bonauenturae seraphici doctoris ... Tomus quintus, De virtutibus
First published 1676
Bontempi's Palladium theologicum (Lyon 1676) is a complete scholastic theology composed ad mentem D. Bonaventurae, arranged in seven tractatus on the order of the Secunda secundae. This fifth volume, De virtutibus, treats the theological virtues (faith, hope, charity, with their gifts, beatitudes and fruits), the cardinal virtues and their opposite vices, and the states and offices of men (religious and prelates, bishops, princes), including the extensive disputations on contracts, religion, vows, fortitude, temperance and the judicial process. It is a significant example of the Bonaventurian scholastic school and a counterpart to the Thomist manuals of the period.
Tractatus I: PRIMUS DE VIRTUTIBUS THEOLOGICIS
Proemium I: Prooemium
Disputatio I: ON FAITH
Quaestio I: What FAITH signifies, and what it is
Quaestio II: What the object of FAITH is
Quaestio III: Whether the object of FAITH is something complex
Quaestio IV: Whether the object of FAITH can be false
Quaestio V: Whether the object of FAITH can be evident scientifically
Quaestio VI: Whether FAITH is concerned with those things which are seen by vision on the way
Quaestio VII: Whether the articles of FAITH are evidently credible
Quaestio VIII: Whether the things to be believed are rightly arranged according to the articles
Quaestio IX: Whether the articles of FAITH have grown over the course of time
Quaestio X: Whether FAITH has grown as regards light
Quaestio XI: Whether Faith has grown in certitude
Quaestio XII: Whether the articles of Faith are to be expounded by some authority which is an infallible teacher, and what it is
Quaestio XIII: What are the marks of the true Church, in which the authority of expounding FAITH resides
Quaestio XIV: What must be believed by the necessity of means
Quaestio XV: What things are to be believed by the necessity of precept
Quaestio XVI: Whether we are bound to confess FAITH, and when
Quaestio XVII: Whether it is lawful to dispute about FAITH, and when
Quaestio XVIII: Whether Faith resides in the Intellect
Quaestio XIX: Whether Faith is perfected by Charity, as by its form
Quaestio XX: Whether it is certain that FAITH remains without CHARITY
Quaestio XXI: Whether, and how, FAITH is a VIRTUE
Quaestio XXII: Whether FAITH is ONE VIRTUE
Quaestio XXIII: Whether FAITH is the first of the Virtues
Quaestio XXIV: Whether FAITH is more certain than any science, or than any intellectual habit
Quaestio XXV: Whether one can know with certainty that he has FAITH
Quaestio XXVI: In whom FAITH is found
Quaestio XXVII: Whether FAITH is a substantial Gift of GOD
Quaestio XXVIII: Whether the difference between FAITH and other acts, natural as opposed to supernatural moral acts, always arises from the object
Quaestio XXIX: On the effects of FAITH
Quaestio XXX: On the GIFT OF UNDERSTANDING
Dubitatio I: Whether UNDERSTANDING is a gift of the Holy Ghost
Dubitatio II: Whether the GIFT OF UNDERSTANDING can coexist with FAITH
Dubitatio III: Whether the GIFT OF UNDERSTANDING consists in the contemplation of the Creator and of Creation
Dubitatio IV: Whether the GIFT OF UNDERSTANDING is found in all who have grace, and whether in these alone
Dubitatio V: What is the necessity and utility of the GIFT OF UNDERSTANDING
Dubitatio VI: Whether* **the GIFT OF UNDERSTANDING** *corresponds to the sixth beatitude, namely, Blessed are the clean of heart, etc.
Dubitatio VII: Whether* **to the GIFT OF UNDERSTANDING** *there corresponds, among the fruits of the Holy Ghost, Faith
Quaestio XXXI: On the Gift of Knowledge
Dubitatio I: Whether* **KNOWLEDGE** *is a gift of the Holy Ghost
Dubitatio II: Whether knowledge is concerned with Divine things
Dubitatio III: Whether the gift of knowledge is speculative
Dubitatio IV: Whether the third Beatitude corresponds to the Gift of Knowledge: Blessed are they that mourn, etc.
Disputatio II: On Unbelief
Quaestio I: What UNBELIEF is, and what kind of sin it is
Quaestio II: Whether all the works of unbelievers are sins
Quaestio III: Whether unbelievers can be compelled to hear FAITH
Quaestio IV: Whether unbelievers can be compelled to embrace our FAITH, when it has been sufficiently set forth
Quaestio V: Whether unbaptized unbelievers can be compelled to abandon errors or rites contrary to natural reason
Quaestio VI: Whether the rites of unbelievers are to be permitted
Quaestio VII: Whether it is lawful to make agreements with unbelievers about the toleration of their rites
Quaestio VIII: Whether unbaptized unbelievers can retain power over the Faithful, and whether they can be deprived of it
Disputatio III: On Heresy
Quaestio I: What HERESY is
What HAERESIS (Heresy) is.
The NAME of Heresy has its origin from eligo, in Greek αἵρεσις, and it signifies an Opinion which one voluntarily and pertinaciously elects for himself, as they commonly teach with D. Bonav. here. Whence it is also called a Sect, because we follow it; and in that sense the various sects of the Philosophers were so called, because, withdrawing from the common body, they erected new Schools, as S. Bonaventura says here.
But the name of Sect was once in a good sense, as Act. 24. et 26. Now however the name of sect must be abstained from for indicating our religion, as Suarez says disp. 19. sect. 2. Lugo disp. 20. sect. 1. because it avails for expressing only alien religions, as Beda notes ad 24. Act. and we now call heretics Sectaries, and we derive sect not from following, but from persecuting, as S. Doct. notes here.
Heresy is DEFINED: Est error, fidei Catholicae contrarius, cui pertinaci animo inhaereat is, qui est professus fidem in Baptismo. It is an error contrary to the Catholic faith, to which he who has professed the faith in Baptism adheres with pertinacious mind. Thus Turrecremata defines it, lib. 4. Summae, p. 2. cap. 1. from the common mind of the Doctors in 4. dist. 13. where D. Bonav. dub. 4. D. Thom. quaest. 11. art. 2. ad 3. and his Interpreters. And more safely D. Bonau. in speculo animae, cap. 1. and p. 1. Centil. sect. 26. But in the former place D. Bonau. defines a heretic in these words: Haereticus est qui divinae legis ignorantia, vel contemptu, pertinax inventor proprii erroris, aut alieni sectator, Catholicae veritati mavult adversari, quam subiici. A heretic is he who, through ignorance or contempt of the divine law, a pertinacious inventor of his own error or a follower of another's, would rather oppose the Catholic truth than submit to it. Concerning this definition many questions occur.
The FIRST is: Whether error from ignorance is heresy: whether doubt, or merely probable assertion about matters of faith is heresy. What pertinacity is required for heresy: Whether it is required for heresy that it be in a baptized person, and other similar questions, which we shall run through.
Meanwhile I note that heresy is divided into Formal, and Objective. Formal is that actual sin by which someone is formally denominated a heretic: Objective indeed is the object which is falsely believed or asserted by the heretic, v. g. that Christ is not God, etc.