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
Quaestio II: Whether one who doubts about the articles of FAITH is a heretic
Quaestio III: Whether one who gives merely opinionative assent to an article of FAITH is a heretic
Quaestio IV: Whether, and what, Ignorance excuses from Heresy
Quaestio V: What pertinacity is required for HERESY
Quaestio VI: Whether, for one to be deemed a Heretic, it is necessary that he have been baptized and a believer
Quaestio VII: Whether the Church can compel heretics to receive the Catholic FAITH
Quaestio VIII: On the other means the Church uses against heretics, by forbidding their Books
Quaestio IX: Whether we are bound to avoid the conversation of heretics
Quaestio X: What excommunication is inflicted upon heretics
Quaestio XI: On the other spiritual punishments of heretics
Quaestio XII: On the temporal punishments of Heretics
Disputatio IV: On Hope
Quaestio I: What HOPE is
Quaestio II: What the material object of HOPE is
Question III
Quaestio IV: Whether a certain object is set forth for HOPE, and is hoped for
Quaestio V: Whether Hope is a Virtue
Quaestio VI: Whether HOPE is a Theological Virtue
Quaestio VII: Whether HOPE is at times formless
Quaestio VIII: Whether HOPE arises from merits
Quaestio IX: Whether Hope precedes Charity
Quaestio X: What the proximate subject of HOPE is
Quaestio XI: Whether HOPE remains in the Blessed
Quaestio XII: Whether there is a precept of hoping in GOD
Dubitatio I: UNICA. Would this precept bind one to whom certain damnation had been revealed
Disputatio V: On the Gift of Fear
Quaestio I: Whether FEAR is a Habit distinct from HOPE
Quaestio II: What the object of FEAR is
Quaestio III: Whether worldly Fear is always evil
Quaestio IV: Whether servile Fear is honorable, and a Gift of God
Quaestio V: Whether servile Fear is cast out when grace comes
Quaestio VI: Whether Initial and Filial Fear differ specifically
We must discern the object of each, that we may perceive the distinction of the habits.
Concerning the object of Initial Fear they say that its medium is between the object of servile Fear, which is punishment; and the object of filial fear, which is the reason of the offense of God. Therefore the object of Initial Fear is both offense and punishment; but offense the more principal. The object of filial Fear, moreover, has for its object the evil of fault, inasmuch as it is an offense of God, not simply, but attending to the supreme reverence of the Father.
It is proved by the Saintly Doctor on the seven gifts. On the Gift of Fear, and here dist. 36, art. 2, question 1, because it arises from filial charity, by which we love God with no respect had to our own advantage or disadvantage; and in this way it fears separation from God, as the Saintly Doctor shows dub. 3, the text being as follows: that it is not a fear of separation from God inasmuch as it is our good, as Durandus thinks dist. 3, dist. 34, saying that the pain of sense is regarded and fled from by servile fear; but the pain of loss by filial Fear; surely a fear of separation here would be from the love of concupiscence, and not from perfect Charity, that is, the love of friendship, as Caspensis notes disput. 2, sect. 1, num. 5.
Hence therefore I assert that these loves are divided into diverse ones, at least modally.
It is proved by St. Bonaventure first, because thus the Fears are divided by D. Augustine, by the Master, and by other Fathers into Initial, Filial, etc.
Next, because the principal objects are diverse, as I showed, for Initial regards punishment more principally than offense: But filial flees principally the offense of God.
You will object. If one of two opposites is not multiplied, neither is the other multiplied; but Hope, the opposite of Fear, is not multiplied: Therefore neither is Fear.
The SAINTLY DOCTOR answers, that the major is true of the division of univocals, as Aristotle testifies in the Post-praedamenta, chapter on opposites; and Metaphysics 3, tract 4. But hope and fear are not opposed univocally. Fear, moreover, is divided more than Hope, because the latter always tends toward one supreme good; but Fear flees from many evils principally, according to the diverse states, as I said.
You will object secondly. More and less do not vary the species: but initial and filial Fear differ as the less perfect from the more perfect: Therefore.
The SAINTLY DOCTOR answers, that there is not there on that account a specific difference; otherwise we should have to posit also another middle fear, that is, of the proficient. Then he answers that they do not differ only as the less perfect from the more perfect; but by the principal motive, although one in a certain way supposes the other, and what was formal with respect to the initial becomes material to the filial.
You will object thirdly. If it is pleasing thus to distinguish Fear; one can also distinguish Love, from which Fear remains, into Initial and Perfect: But Love is not distinguished in species by these differences: Therefore neither is Fear.
The SAINTLY DOCTOR answers by denying the parity, because love has no diverse motives, but is perfected only by reason of state.
You will object fourthly. As is the univocal cause, so is the effect; but both these Fears arise from gratuitous love, from D. Augustine Tractate 43 on John. Therefore.
The SAINTLY DOCTOR answers that love is not the univocal cause of Fear, whence from one love are generated not only diverse differences of Fears; but even three genera of affections, as D. Augustine teaches Tractate 9 on the epistle of John.
You will object fifthly. If there are several gratuitous Fears: therefore the gifts of the Holy Spirit are eight.
The SAINTLY DOCTOR answers, that one fear, which is the initial, is included in the other as to what is said of nobility; and therefore is included in the one Spirit of the Fear of the Lord.
You will object sixthly. If these Fears differ, because Initial flees also punishment, and Filial the offense of God: Then thus: In the offense there is to offend God, which is fault; and to be separated from God through enmity, which are diverse: Therefore two Fears.
The SAINTLY DOCTOR answers. That initial Fear regards two things; but principally one, consequentially the other: Similarly also the Filial; therefore there is one principal motive, diverse in both, whence the Fears ought to vary. The reason of the offense, inasmuch as it signifies the separation, which is a punishment, is less regarded by the Filial; and principally by the Initial.