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
Quaestio VII: Whether, as Charity grows, Fear diminishes
Quaestio VIII: Whether gratuitous Fear remains in the fatherland
Quaestio IX: Whether Poverty of Spirit corresponds to the GIFT OF FEAR
Quaestio X: On the Effects, and the precept, of the FEAR OF GOD
Disputatio VI: On Despair
Quaestio I: UNICA. Of what power DESPAIR is an act, and what sin it is
Disputatio VII: On Presumption
Quaestio I: What PRESUMPTION is, and what kind of sin
Disputatio VIII: On Charity
Quaestio I: What CHARITY is
Quaestio II: What the object of Charity is
Quaestio III: Whether Charity is properly the friendship of God
Quaestio IV: Whether Charity is a created Habit
Whether Charity is a created Habit.
The MAGISTER, 1. dist. 17, is seen to assert that the charity by which we love God is the Holy Spirit himself, moving the will of man to love without any infused habit; yet he is interpreted most benignly by S. Doct.: not because the Holy Spirit is the form of the soul disposing it to love, but because he moves the affection immediately without a habit. Yet even in this he falls short.
I assert therefore that Charity is a habit. This is the common view of Theologians, and after the Council of Trent certain from faith.
IT IS PROVED by D. Bonav. That which has the ratio of a form infused by God, or by the Holy Spirit, is something created, distinct from its efficient cause, namely from the Holy Spirit; but the Charity of God is poured forth in our hearts by the Holy Spirit, who is given to us from cap. 5. ad Rom. The Major is evident: for God cannot be a form, otherwise he would be an imperfect inexisting part, and every cause differs really from its effect. By this argument the Council of Trent, session 6, defines, cap. 7, The charity of God is poured forth in the hearts of those who are justified, and inheres in them. And can. 11 defines that men are not justified by the sole remission of sins, with grace and charity excluded, which is poured forth and inheres in their hearts. Again, the Minor is proved from the Council of Orange, can. 25. It is altogether a Gift of God to love God; for the Spirit of the Father and the Son pours charity into our hearts, whom we love with the Father and the Son. The same is proved in the Council of Vienne, as is related in Clement. unica, de summa Trinitate. The Minor is confirmed again; for as Faith and Hope are ordered to reforming the mind, so much more is Charity, which is the life of the soul: therefore a form. But God cannot be a form, because he cannot enter into composition with another being, as is necessary for the esse of a form.
IT IS PROVED by S. Doct. fundamento 4. from all the Scriptures which assert that Charity grows, diminishes, is lost, and recovered. Prima Ioan. 2. Whoever keeps his word, truly in this the Charity of God is perfected. Philip. 1. This I pray, that the Charity of God may abound more and more. Apoc. 2. You have left your first Charity. Be mindful therefore from where you have fallen: and do penance.
IT IS PROVED lastly. That which distinguishes the just man from the impious not only in act but also in rest, and which those who cannot have proper acts, such as infants, must have, must be created and inhering habitually: for the first cause is related in one way to all; such is Charity according to the Councils cited, defining that it is therefore also infused into infants. Only the Council of Vienne does not define it.
IT IS PROVED also in corpore by S. Doct. If the Holy Spirit were charity, he would be unifiable, and then either by nature or by grace: not by nature, as is evident. If by grace, then again by means of something else, etc.
IT IS PROVED there also by the argument which Valencia uses: That by which the will, as principal cause, elicits the act of love must be created; but Charity is that by which it elicits, etc. Therefore.
YOU OBJECT first. No accident is better than a substance: Charity is better than the soul, for it elevates and perfects it, and nothing is better than it, from D. August. lib. 1. de moribus Ecclesiae: Therefore.
S. Doct. answers that Charity is better as the medium without which the soul lacking it cannot be ordered to the supernatural end: for it is proper to accidents to perfect a substance accidentally. But those things infused by God above nature perfect it intimately, of which they are the illustrious similitude and participation. Such an accident is charity, as is said in 2 Peter, 1, as Valencia notes with D. Thomas.
YOU OBJECT secondly. No created goodness is equivalent to beatitude; but charity is equivalent to Beatitude; for by it we merit glory: Therefore.
S. Bonav. answers that it is equivalent by divine estimation, which deems the work of charity worthy of eternal life.
YOU OBJECT thirdly. Every created good is good by participation, and therefore can fail to be good: therefore lacking order.
IT IS answered that the thing ordered is one thing; the order another; and this cannot fail to be good.
YOU OBJECT fourthly. The Holy Spirit can inflame the affection by himself; therefore a habit is required in vain. The Antecedent is proved: for God is charity, prima Ioan. 4. Therefore prima Cor. 6. it is said: Who cleaves to God is made one spirit with him.
S. Doct. answers that God himself is signified there, and yet Charity is required, informed by which we may work: For we are God's helpers, prima Cor. 3. Therefore inhering charity is posited not from a defect of divine power, but so that we may cooperate with God in a connatural mode, moving through something formally determining.
YOU OBJECT fifthly. A natural virtue is farther from God than the will; but God moves nature immediately: Therefore.
S. Doct. answers that nature, because it operates uniformly and necessarily, determined to one thing, does not need a regulating habit; unlike the will, which moves non-uniformly, being indifferent. Next, the soul is moved only within the limits of nature; but the will above nature, therefore it needs an elevating habit.
YOU OBJECT sixthly. Where there is a first mover, another virtue is superfluous; but God always moves the soul: Therefore.
IT IS answered that another virtue is required for operating in the connatural mode, that it may be formally perfected.
YOU OBJECT seventhly. No lesser virtue is necessary for reforming than for creating; but an infinite virtue is required for creating: Therefore also for reforming: but reformation is done through charity: Therefore this is the infinite Virtue of God.
S. Doct. answers that reformation is from God as efficient, but because this is an elevation to works above nature, some disposing form is required.
YOU OBJECT eighthly. No vanity can be united to God; every creature is vanity: Therefore it cannot unite to God; but charity unites to God: Therefore it is not a creature.
S. Doct. answers that grace, as a creature, is empty; but as it is a Divine influence it is not vanity.
YOU OBJECT ninthly. That which orders to the ordered love must be proportioned; but charity orders to loving God, who is an infinite good: Therefore infinitely: Therefore it must be something infinite.
S. Doct. answers that Charity does not make us love God as much as he is lovable, but as much as he ought to be loved by us, so that he be esteemed above all creatures, which could be infinite in number; and for this finite supernatural Charity suffices, that it be preferred in estimation to the other goods.
From what has been said you have what censure was owed to those denying that charity is a habit: for I judge with Valencia here, and Soto lib. 2. de natura, et gratia, cap. 17. et 18., Bannes quaest. 23. art. 2., that it is indeed not heresy to deny it, from the Council of Vien. loc. cit. and Innocent, cap. Maiores de Baptismo, where the denying opinion is not condemned; but only the opposite is asserted as more probable. Yet I say it is rash, and proximate to error, as Valencia notes with Gabriel dist. 23. art. 2. quaest. 2.
For the Church in the Council of Trent seems to define this equivalently. And the Scriptures speak of charity as of a permanent habit: Charity never falls away, prima Corinth. 13. There remain Faith, Hope, Charity, these three: Apoc. 2. You have left your first Charity, etc. But if charity were not a habit, it would not incline so perfectly, easily, and delectably to loving God, as D. Thom. also argues with D. Bonav. ad argumenta; for potencies do not have a perfect connection to acts except through habits, which were instituted by God for eliciting acts, giving the potency a mode of facility; and if they are supernatural, they elevate the potency even to sustaining acts.
From these you will understand what the Magister opposes from prima Ioan. 3. God is charity, and he who abides in charity abides in God, and God in him. He means to say that God is the author of charity. For it is said also: our Patience, causally, and he who abides in charity, namely infused, etc. It is thus expounded by S. Doct. opusculo Reductio artium ad Theologiam; et de septem donis, de Dono intellectus, cap. 5. et de 7. Itineribus aeternitatis, dist. 6.