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
Quaestio XIII: Whether Charity can be lost, and how
Whether Charity can be corrupted, and how.
Of old there was the error of the Jovinians, who said that Charity and grace, once had, cannot be lost. So reports D. Jerome Lib. 1 [contra Iovinianum] and 1 against the same.
In that error was also Pelagius, as is clear from D. Augustine Lib. de haeresibus, cap. 88. Likewise the Beghards and Beguines, as is clear from the Clementine, Ad nostram. Wycliffe, as Vega reports Lib. 12 super Concilium, cap. 22. Finally Calvin, who devoured nearly all heresies, swallowed this one too Lib. 3 Instit. cap. 4. Bellarmine reports and refutes them Lib. 3 de Iustific. cap. 14. Bouetius demonstr. 2 Symb. 2 art. 3. Valencia 1. 2 disp. 3 q. 2 puncto 4. S. Bonaventure calls this error madness.
Yet the true and Catholic de fide teaching is that a just man can fall from Charity.
It is proved by D. Bonaventure first by examples recounted many times in Scripture.
For first Adam and Eve, established in grace, sinned most grievously; whence the sin of Adam found death Rom. 5. By one man sin entered into this world, and by sin death.
Next Saul was just; for so you have 1 Reg. 9. Saul was elect and good: and there was not among the sons of Israel a man better than he. The same is intimated cap. 15 and 16, and adduced by D. Augustine Lib. 2 ad Simplicianum, quaest. 1. Cyprian Lib. 1 epist. 5. Whence you see Calvin lying, who denies it.
Accordingly David was so just that of him it was said, Act. 13. I have found David the man after my own heart, who shall do all my wills. This testimony was taken from 1 Reg. 16. But who will deny that he sinned gravely by the homicide of Urias and adultery with Bethsabee? Surely his penitential Psalms openly testify to his repentance, which presupposes sin.
The son of David also, Solomon, was just; for of him 2 Reg. 7. the Lord says: I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a son; and cap. 12. And he called his name Solomon, and the Lord loved him. And he sent by the hand of Nathan the prophet, and called his name, Beloved of the Lord, because the Lord loved him. He was the son of David, a holy man, from which Calvin and Peter Martyr infer that he was holy. But that this man in old age fell from justice, Scripture testifies 3 Reg. 11. where his Idolatries are enumerated, and his filthy loves with forbidden women Exodi 34, and he is proclaimed condemned by many holy Fathers, whom Serlogus reports in the Antilogiae of the Canticle, Pineda de rebus Salomonis, and others. Hear D. Augustine Lib. 22 cont. Faustum, cap. 88. What shall I say of Solomon? Whom holy Scripture vehemently charges and condemns; and it commemorates nothing at all of his repentance or of God's indulgence toward him.
Let us come to the just of the New Testament. Peter without doubt was just, of whom Matth. 16. Blessed art thou Simon Bar-Iona. And Ioan. 13. He who is washed, needeth not but to wash his feet, etc. And you are clean, but not all. For he knew who was about to betray him. Therefore he acclaims all the Apostles as just, Judas excepted; and yet he sinned lethally, denying Christ, as he notes from D. Augustine tract. 66 in Ioan. S. Bonaventure ad eum locum, and the Magdeburgenses confess it Centur. 1 Lib. 2 cap. 10.
Iudas therefore was previously just, as D. Jerome shows Lib. 3 adversus Pelagianos, from those words of the Lord, Ioan. 17. Father, those whom thou hast given me I have kept, and none of them is lost but the son of perdition, as S. Bonaventure saw in his commentary.
Similarly the other Apostles, whom I showed above to be just, doubted in faith, as it is had in Mark and Luke, last chapter.
Some disciples also Ioannis 6. went back and left Christ.
It is proved secondly by S. Thomas from the testimonies of Scripture asserting it. Prima Corinth. 10. He who thinks himself to stand, let him take heed lest he fall. Ezech. 18. When the just man shall turn himself away from his justice and do iniquity, he shall die in it. The same is had in chapter 33. Bouer adds these.
By yourselves justice stands in Faith alone: Therefore it also is lost. Lucae 8. For that on the rock, who when they hear the word with joy receive it; but these have no roots, for they believe for a while, and in time of temptation fall away. To which passage S. Thomas adds Deuter. 32. of the people: He forsook God his saviour. And Oseae 7. Woe to them, for they have departed from me. Ioan. 15. Every branch in me not bearing fruit, he will take it away. Where S. Bonaventure observes that these branches were once living, and are taken away because the graces of God are lacking, contrary to the warning Heb. 12. and are taken away stripped of grace and cast into the fire, as D. Augustine expounds tract. 81.
Matth. 24. Iniquity shall abound, and the Charity of many shall grow cold. But he that shall persevere to the end, he shall be saved. Prima Cor. 9. I chastise my body, lest perhaps, when I have preached to others, I myself should become a reprobate. Galat. 5. You are made void of Christ, who are justified in the Law; you are fallen from grace. Prima Timot. first chapter. Some have suffered shipwreck concerning the faith. And cap. 4. In the last days some shall depart from the Faith; and cap. 6. Which some seeking after, have erred from the Faith. Heb. 6. It is impossible for those who were once illuminated, have tasted also the heavenly gift, and been made partakers of the Holy Spirit; have nevertheless tasted the good word of God and the powers of the world to come, and are fallen away, to be renewed again unto repentance. Apoc. 2. I have somewhat against thee: that thou hast left thy first Charity; be mindful from whence thou art fallen, etc.
It is PROVED thirdly from the definition of the Church. In the Council of Vienne, as is had in the Clementine cis; of Trent sess. 6 cap. 12 and 13 and can. 23. where it is said: If anyone shall say that a man once justified cannot sin again, nor lose grace, and therefore that he who falls and sins was never truly justified; let him be anathema.
It is PROVED fourthly by S. Thomas from the authorities of the Fathers which the Master reports. To these add the holy Augustine Lib. de corrept. et gratia, cap. 13 and Lib. de praedest. Sanctorum, cap. 14. Cyprian Lib. de Lapsis, Ambrose exhort. ad Poenit. Jerome Lib. 2 contra Iovinianum, Gregory lib. 1 moral. c. 42 and lib. 30 cap. 32. Chrysostom homil. 24 in Matth.
It is PROVED fifthly by S. Thomas: It is certain that baptized infants are justified and enriched with grace and Charity, and yet many in adult age sin gravely, even by falling away from the Faith. The major is conceded also by the Lutherans; indeed Calvin, Peter Martyr, and Bucer assert it even without baptism, as Bellarmine reports, who presses this argument.
But who will say that all of them are predestinated and impeccable? Yet if all baptized in infancy are predestinated and cannot perish, by what reasoning do we cry all the baptized children of Antichrist and miserably fallen?
It is PROVED sixthly. It is easier to fall away from Charity than to make progress; and to fall than to rise; it is easier also to lose Charity than faith; because when Faith is lost, Charity is lost, but not the reverse; but it is possible for a man who has not Charity to acquire it: it is possible also for a man having Faith to fall away from the Faith: Therefore it is easier for one having Charity to fall from it.
It is PROVED seventhly by S. Thomas: The state of the way is such that free will is free for good and for evil, which is clear from so many precepts, exhortations, promises for good works, threats against sins, with which the whole of Scripture is filled for the present state; all of which would be in vain if man could not fall and did not have liberty toward either.
The heretics OBJECT with many authorities, Cant. 8. Many waters cannot extinguish Charity.
S. Thomas responds in the Diaeta, tit. 5 cap. 2. that Charity is that fire of which Lucae 12. I am come to cast fire on the earth, and what will I, if it be kindled? and it is kindled by our will cooperating, as S. Thomas observes ad 12 Lucae. And so Charity is not extinguished so long as we do not will it to be extinguished. Water indeed that is natural extinguishes fire naturally; but waters that are not natural, among which tribulations also are reckoned, do not extinguish Charity. S. Ambrose Lib. 1 de Iacob cap. 7. and Gregory to this passage understand tribulations by these waters: for Charity endureth all things, from prima Cor. 13.
They OBJECT secondly with Ioan. 4. Whoever shall drink of this water shall not thirst forever; but there shall be made in him a fountain of water springing up unto life eternal.
S. Thomas responds to this passage that he who, drinking of this water, rests in it forever, does not thirst for the waters of concupiscence; and while he refuses the waters of the concupiscence of Egypt, he does not lose these waters: For they that drink me shall yet thirst. Eccl. 24, says the Wise Man. Therefore if beside the precious fountain of spiritual goods, which when had are ever more dear, standing in them we hold our lips greedily, as St. Augustine says Lib. 1 de doct. Christiana, cap. 38. and Gregory homil. 36 in Evang. and ever drink greedily, he will give perennial waters. See also collation 21 of S. Bonaventure on cap. 4 Ioannis, where he treats of it admirably.
They OBJECT thirdly with Rom. 8. For I am sure that neither death, nor life, etc. shall be able to separate us from the Charity of God.
S. Thomas responds in the Diaeta, tit. 5 cap. 2, and de sex alis Seraphim, cap. 2 and 7 and 8, and de septem Itineribus AEternitatis, dist. 6 and Itinere 4 dist. 5 art. 2. with D. Augustine Lib. de moribus Ecclesiae, cap. 11. that the power of Charity is here expressed, that if it burn in us it makes us undaunted against all tribulations; provided however that we wish to be constant, as Bellarmine also says; and therefore Augustine warns in the same place that Charity can be lost in the way.
S. Thomas responds secondly de septem Itineribus AEternitatis, Itinere 4 dist. 5, and in the little work on the Incendium amoris, cap. 2. that the Apostle speaks with a certain vehemence of resolve, inflamed in prayer, and promising to himself a certain moral security from the grace of God.
They OBJECT fourthly with prima Corinrh. 13. Charity never falleth away.
S. Thomas responds 3 dist. 31 art. 3 quaest. 1. that it does not fall away of itself, because both in this life and in the future it has its place, as the Gloss says: but in contrast to Faith and Hope, which cease from their entity; the Apostle does not will, however, that no one fall from Charity. S. Thomas also refers to the responses of the Master.
They OBJECT fifthly, prima Ioan. 3. Whoever is born of God sinneth not: for his seed abideth in him, and he cannot sin; because he is born of God.
It is answered from D. Augustine tract. 5 in epist. Ioan. Jerome Lib. 1 adversus Pelag. and Lib. 2 contra Iovinianum, that while grace abides in us, preserving us in the state of sons of God, we cannot sin; for on that supposition Charity abides, which is contrary to aversion from God: This response is also D. Bonaventure's ad tertium.
They also ADD the presumptuous saying attributed to Augustine epist. 111. Charity which can be deserted was never true.
It is answered, that this is not D. Augustine's.
S. Thomas responds secondly 3 dist. 31 dub. 1. that the major is true, that is, with respect to the accomplishment of the End, whence it is rather called vain, or void of the end of Faith.
You OBJECT first, Charity is stronger than natural love; but the latter unites indissolubly: Therefore.
S. Thomas responds, that Charity is not more noble than natural love in indissolubility, but in object and term and supernatural end.
You OBJECT secondly. A weaker cannot expel a stronger with more force; but Charity is strong as death: Therefore.
S. Thomas responds; that Charity is not expelled in combat by sin, but fails from the demerit of the sinner and God refusing influx.
You OBJECT thirdly; Because sin arises either from love or from perverse fear, from D. Bernard Lib. de diligendo Deo, cap. 8. but one having Charity admits neither a perverse fear that depresses, nor a love that wrongly inflames: Therefore.
S. Thomas responds, that these evil affections are not actually in the composite sense together with Charity prior in time to sin; yet they can be induced previously in origin and expel Charity; for free will, made straight by Charity, can be curved by cupidity.
You OBJECT fourthly: The will follows the predominant affection; but this is Charity: Therefore.
It is answered, that the will follows the affection actually predominant, but not the habit; therefore, although Charity predominate by habit, nevertheless an act can arise that turns the will away, while man established in grace forgets God and thinks on the things of the world.
You OBJECT fifthly. One having Charity has Christ for foundation, and the Holy Spirit for aid.
It is answered, that Christ sustains only those willing, and the Holy Spirit aids those cooperating. But how mortal sin destroys Charity, physically or morally, was disputed prima secundae, Tract. de Peccato, diff. 1 quaest. 6. where I showed that grace and sin are opposed morally, not physically, with D. Bonaventure in the places there adduced, and in 3 dist. 31 a. 1, Scotus in 4 dist. 16 quaest. 2 against the Thomists.
It is proved also by D. Bonaventure to the second. Man does not attain the effective production of Charity, because he cannot attain creation: Therefore neither annihilation. For every agent, as it acts from a subject, so it resolves its effect into a subject.
Whence the response of Calpensis fell, taken from the corruption of natural forms, insofar as something which did not produce a form can destroy it by producing something contrary to it. This response, I say, is vain; because sin is not a formal entity able to expel Charity; but it is a privation: And if it were a form, it would not have annihilative virtue, just as it has not creative virtue.