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
Quaestio V: Whether Charity is one special Virtue
Quaestio VI: Whether Charity is of a most special species
Quaestio VII: Whether Charity is the most excellent of the virtues
Quaestio VIII: Whether Charity is the Form of the Virtues
Quaestio IX: Whether besides infused Charity there is another charity, acquired by our own acts
Quaestio X: Whether Charity can be formless
Quaestio XI: Whether CHARITY increases, and how
Quaestio XII: Whether, and how, CHARITY in this life is perfect
IT IS CERTAIN, as the holy Doctor says dist. 17, last question, that there are some perfect in Charity, even in the wayfaring state. That perfection is twofold, as D. Bonaventure teaches 3. dist. 30, question 2. One is of necessity, which excludes mortal sin, by observing the law: the other of supererogation, of which Matth. 19. If thou wilt be perfect, go, etc. But the perfection of this life is that in Charity of which the latter speaks, Ioan. 3, not one that excludes even venial sins; for this is the perfection of the fatherland, while this other is that of the way, of Christ, and of his sweetest mother, as S. Bonaventure indicates loco cit. and the Council of Milevis defines cap. 6, 7, and 8. and the Council of Trent session 6, cap. 11 and can. 13. Hence D. Augustine Lib. 1. de doct. Christ. cap. 39. concludes that there is no perfection in the way equal to the perfection of some blessed soul. Therefore in this life there is perfect charity, as D. Augustine says above, and D. Bernard serm. 2. de S. Michaële, when, the passions having been tamed, the soul is found expedite for the acts of the virtues. The Charity of the way is divided into the Charity of Beginners, of the Proficient, and of the Perfect. See D. Thom. art. 8.
IT IS PROVED by D. Bonaventure primo, dist. 27. part. 2. quaest. 2. Forms are intensified by approach to their term and by the removal of the admixture of the contrary, from Aristotle 3. Top. cap. 4. and 3. Phys. text 19. but as concupiscence diminishes, Charity in the way is increased and perfected, from D. Augustine Lib. 83. qq. question 36. and in Enchir. last chapter; which is 121. For the fervor of Charity is intensified, which leads to perfection, although the degrees of Charity themselves would also be increased even if concupiscence were not present, as is evident in the Angels, and in Adam innocent, in whom Charity would have been increased confess. cap. 29. He loves thee less who loves something with thee which he does not love for thy sake.
The holy Doctor answers, Charity is diminished as to fervor. And although by venial sin one disposes oneself to the ruin of Charity; yet God does not on that demerit, congruously, diminish charity; just as he increases it from the disposition of good acts, because God is more prone to show mercy than to punish. Hence the following objection is solved.
You object secondly. As man advances while profiting, so he falls back; but by progress Charity is increased: Therefore while he falls back, it is diminished.
The holy Doctor answers, from what has been said, that man in falling back is only weakened as to fervor, because Charity is not destroyed except by the mortal contrary; while he profits, he ascends as to the degrees of Charity meritoriously. Moreover God is more prone to bestow graces than to inflict punishments.
You object thirdly. That which is the cause of its own weakening in the term is the cause of diminution in the way; but the will in aversion is the cause of the destruction of Charity: Therefore also in disposition it is the cause of diminution.
The holy Doctor answers, by denying the Major: for a substantial form is destroyed only in the term, and no part of it in the time of the dispositions.
He answers secondly, that the Major is true when the disposition and the term are of the same rational character; but in our case the term is mortal sin; the disposition, however, is venial.
He answers thirdly, that Charity depends on the Divine influence and acceptance; and thus God increases it, accepting the works; nor does he impute venial sins to this penalty.
You object fourthly. Opposites naturally come to be about the same thing; but charity is increased: Therefore it is also diminished.
The holy Doctor answers, granting the Major, unless one be present by nature and the other not: increase is in Charity by nature, with the acceptance of God added; but diminution comes only from our own will: Therefore.
You object fifthly. Things that are separable can be separated; but the first degrees of Charity were without the degrees added by increase: Therefore.
The holy Doctor answers, that there is nothing to separate them, and therefore they cannot be separated; for neither can we do it, who do not physically influence the habit of Charity; nor yet God, who does not influence it except to destruction, and indeed with man first turning himself away.