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
Quaestio XIV: What is the proximate subject of Charity
Quaestio XV: Whether God alone is to be loved out of Charity, or the neighbor also
Quaestio XVI: Whether Charity is to be loved out of Charity
Quaestio XVII: Whether all gratuitous gifts are to be loved out of CHARITY
Quaestio XVIII: Whether irrational creatures are to be loved out of CHARITY
Quaestio XIX: Whether a man ought to love himself out of CHARITY
Quaestio XX: Whether a man ought to love his own body out of Charity
Quaestio XXI: Whether sinners are to be loved out of Charity
Quaestio XXII: Whether it is necessary to love enemies out of CHARITY
Quaestio XXIII: Whether we are bound to show the effects of CHARITY toward enemies, and which
Quaestio XXIV: Whether Angels are to be loved out of CHARITY
Quaestio XXV: Whether Demons, and the Damned, are to be loved out of CHARITY
Quaestio XXVI: Whether it is fitting that four things to be loved out of CHARITY are enumerated
Quaestio XXVII: Whether God, and the neighbor, are loved with the same habit of CHARITY
Quaestio XXVIII: Whether there is order in CHARITY
Quaestio XXIX: Whether GOD is to be loved more than the neighbor
Quaestio XXX: Whether a man ought out of CHARITY to love God more than himself
Quaestio XXXI: Whether Nature inclines more to loving GOD than to loving ourselves
Quaestio XXXII: Whether a man ought to love himself more than his neighbor
Quaestio XXXIII: Whether the eternal salvation of the neighbor is to be loved more than our own life
Quaestio XXXIV: Whether one neighbor is to be loved more than another
Quaestio XXXV: Whether a Son is to be loved more than a Father
Quaestio XXXVI: Whether a man ought out of CHARITY to love his Mother more than his Father
Quaestio XXXVII: Whether a man ought to love his spouse more than his parents, and Children
Quaestio XXXVIII: Whether the order of CHARITY is considered in the affection, and in the effect
Quaestio XXXIX: Whether the order of CHARITY remains in heaven
Quaestio XL: Whether it is more proper to Charity to love than to be loved
Quaestio XLI: Whether Love is the same as Benevolence
Quaestio XLII: Whether, and whether he can, GOD must be loved in the way with the whole heart, the whole soul, the whole mind, and all one's strength
Quaestio XLIII: Whether some measure is to be kept in Divine love
Quaestio XLIV: Whether Charity ought to be enlarged in heaven
Quaestio XLV: Whether it is more meritorious to love an enemy than a friend
Quaestio XLVI: Whether a man, constituted in however small CHARITY, is bound to undergo death for CHRIST
Quaestio XLVII: Whether those having perfect CHARITY are bound to fulfill the things that are of perfection
Quaestio XLVIII: How, and when, the precept of the love of GOD binds
Quaestio XLIX: Whether a man is bound at the first instant of the use of reason to be converted to GOD
Quaestio L: How, and when, the precept of the love of the neighbor binds
Disputatio IX: On the internal effects of Charity, JOY, PEACE, and MERCY
§ I: On Joy
Quaestio I: Whether JOY is an Effect of Charity, and of what kind
Quaestio II: Whether JOY is a virtue
§ II: On Peace
Quaestio I: UNICA. What PEACE is
§ III: On Mercy
Quaestio I: What MERCY is
Quaestio II: Which, and what kind of Virtue, MERCY is
Disputatio X: On the external effects of Charity
§ I: De Beneficentia
Quaestio I: UNICA. What BENEFICENCE is
§ II: On Almsgiving
Quaestio I: Whether to give ALMS is an act of Charity
Quaestio II: Whether the kinds of ALMS are fittingly distinguished
Quaestio III: Whether ALMS is a matter of precept
Quaestio IV: Whether it is a precept, in common necessities, to give superfluities to the poor
Quaestio V: Whether anyone is bound at some time to give alms from things necessary to his state, apart from the extreme necessity of the neighbor
Quaestio VI: Whether alms is owed out of justice to one in extreme need
Quaestio VII: Whether Alms ought to be given from justly possessed goods
§ III: On Fraternal Correction
Quaestio I: Whether FRATERNAL CORRECTION is a matter of precept
Quaestio II: Whether the order of fraternal correction, even in Religious Orders, is a matter of precept, so that the correction first be made in secret
Disputatio XI: On Hatred
Quaestio I: What the object of HATRED is, and what it is
Quaestio II: What, and what kind of sin, hatred is
Disputatio XII: On Sloth
Quaestio I: What ACEDIA is, and what its object is
Disputatio XIII: On Envy
Quaestio I: What ENVY is, and what its object is
Quaestio II: How perverse ENVY is
Disputatio XIV: On Discord, and Contention
Quaestio I: What DISCORD is, and what kind of sin
Quaestio II: What kind, and how great, a sin Contention is
Disputatio XV: On Schism
Quaestio I: What kind of sin SCHISM is
Quaestio II: How great a sin SCHISM is
Quaestio III: What punishments are owed to SCHISMATICS
Disputatio XVI: DE BELLO
Quaestio I: Whether any war can be just
Quaestio II: What conditions are required for a just war
Quaestio III: By whom BELLUM (war) may be waged
Disputatio XVII: On Quarreling, and Sedition
Quaestio I: What RIXA (quarreling) is, and what kind of sin
Quaestio II: What sedition is
Disputatio XVIII: On Scandal
Quaestio I: What, and of how many kinds, SCANDAL is
Quaestio II: Whether SCANDAL is a special sin
Quaestio III: What is to be done, and what omitted, to avoid scandal
Quaestio IV: Whether it is lawful to persuade one resolved upon a great evil into a lesser evil
Disputatio XIX: On the Gift of Wisdom
Quaestio I: What kind of gift WISDOM is
Quaestio II: What is the usefulness, and necessity, of this Gift
Quaestio III: By what means is the GIFT OF WISDOM obtained from God
Quaestio IV: On the illumination that Wisdom brings
Quaestio V: On the spiritual delights of Wisdom
Quaestio VI: How Folly is opposed to Wisdom
Quaestio VII: Whether the seventh Beatitude corresponds to the gift of Wisdom
Disputatio XX: On Prudence
Quaestio I: What PRUDENCE is
Quaestio II: Whether PRUDENCE is a virtue
Quaestio III: Which are the offices of PRUDENCE
Quaestio IV: Who are the participants in PRUDENCE
Quaestio V: How Prudence is acquired, and lost
Quaestio VI: On the parts of the Virtue of PRUDENCE
Quaestio VII: How certain rules of prudence, applicable to the Monastic and Political state, are drawn from the Angelic Hierarchy
§ I: On the Prudence that men bound by solemn vows claim for themselves from the first choir of Angels
§ II: On the Governance of the Prelates of the Church, from the Second Hierarchy of the First Choir, likened to the Dominations
§ III: On the Prudence of Judges, compared with the Virtues, from the second order of the second Hierarchy
§ IV: On the governance of Princes, and similar Powers
§ V: On the Prudence of individuals, from the lowest Hierarchy
Quaestio I: Whether there is one PRUDENCE for all the moral virtues
Disputatio XXI: On the Gift of Counsel
Quaestio I: What the gift of COUNSEL is, and what its office is
Quaestio II: How the GIFT OF COUNSEL orders the mind
Quaestio III: Whether the Gift of COUNSEL remains in heaven
Quaestio IV: Whether the fifth Beatitude corresponds to the Gift of Counsel
Disputatio XXII: On the Vices contrary to Prudence
Quaestio I: On PRECIPITATION
Quaestio II: On INCONSIDERATENESS
Quaestio III: On INCONSTANCY
Quaestio IV: On Negligence
Quaestio V: On the prudence of the flesh
Quaestio VI: On ASTUTENESS
Quaestio VII: On CRAFT (dolus)
Quaestio VIII: On FRAUD
Quaestio IX: On solicitude for temporal things
Quaestio X: On solicitude for the Future
Quaestio XI: On the precepts of PRUDENCE
Disputatio XXIII: On Justice
Quaestio I: Whether Ius (right) is the object of JUSTICE
Quaestio II: What JUSTICE is
Quaestio III: Whether JUSTICE is a special virtue
Quaestio IV: In what subject JUSTICE consists
Quaestio V: Whether JUSTICE is the most excellent of the moral Virtues
Quaestio VI: What kind of sin INJUSTICE is, and how it is committed
Quaestio VII: Whether Judgment is an act of JUSTICE
Quaestio VIII: By what means the public Judgment of a Judge is just
Quaestio IX: In what way private judgment about the neighbor is illicit
Quaestio X: Whether Distributive JUSTICE differs in species from Commutative
Disputatio XXIV: On Restitution
Quaestio I: What RESTITUTION is
Quaestio II: Whether RESTITUTION is necessary for salvation
Quaestio III: Who is bound to RESTORE
Dubitatio I: Whether he is a true cause of loss without whom the loss would still have followed
Dubitatio II: On the indirect causes of loss
Dubitatio III: Whether one who has promised three or four times to restore, and has not restored, is to be absolved before restitution
Quaestio IV: To whom RESTITUTION is to be made
Quaestio V: What ought to be restored
Dubitatio I: Whether the goods of fortune are to be restored in the same way
Dubitatio II: In what manner RESTITUTION is to be made for goods of the body
Dubitatio III: Whether, and how, RESTITUTION of Fame, and Honor, is to be made
Dubitatio IV: On the restitution of goods of the soul
Dubitatio V: When a thing acquired by contract is to be restored
Dubitatio VI: When things acquired by donation ought to be restored
Dubitatio VII: When things acquired by prescription are to be restored
Dubitatio VIII: When a thing acquired as wages for the function of an office is to be restored
Dubitatio IX: Whether the wages of harlotry are to be restored
Dubitatio X: When things acquired by fowling, fishing, and hunting are to be restored
Dubitatio XI: When things acquired by the use of common things are to be restored
Dubitatio XII: Whether things acquired in illicit games are to be restored
Dubitatio XIII: Which things are to be restored on account of finding
Dubitatio XIV: On the restitution of goods impeded by violence, fraud, or evil intention
Dubitatio XV: Whether anyone is bound to restore defrauded customs duties
Dubitatio XVI: What form is to be observed in a just tribute
Quaestio VI: How much is to be Restored
Quaestio VII: When restitution is to be made, and the causes excusing from it
Dubitatio I: Whether entrance into Religion excuses from Restitution
Dubitatio II: Whether cession of goods excuses from restitution
Dubitatio III: On the causes excusing from Restitution on the part of the creditor
Dubitatio IV: On the causes excusing from restitution on the part of the debtor
Dubitatio V: On the causes excusing from Restitution on the part of the public authority
Quaestio VIII: Where restitution is to be made
Quaestio IX: How restitution is to be made
Quaestio X: In what order restitution is to be made
Quaestio XI: What Acceptance of Persons is, and what kind of sin
Quaestio XII: Whether, and how, it is a sin of acceptance of persons to choose the unworthy, or less deserving, for benefices
Quaestio XIII: Whether Acceptance of persons has place in the showing of honor, and reverence
Quaestio XIV: Whether acceptance of persons finds a place in the sentences of Judges
Dubitatio I: Whether a JUDGE can, without the note of acceptance of persons, adhere to the Favor of friends, when the law is doubtful among the Doctors
Disputatio XXV: On Homicide
Quaestio I: What Homicide is, and of how many kinds
Quaestio II: On homicide from deliberately, insidiously, and treacherously intending it
Quaestio III: Whether one who commands is to be burdened with the same guilt, and punishment as the one who executes
Quaestio IV: Whether an attempt at homicide, and other crimes, is to be punished with the same penalty as the crime consummated
Quaestio V: What are the punishments of voluntary Homicide
Quaestio VI: Whether it is lawful to kill a man with the moderation of blameless defense, for the defense of himself or his goods
Dubitatio I: Whether it is lawful to kill someone to preserve honor, not by fleeing etc.
Dubitatio II: Whether one who is attacked is bound in some case to kill the aggressor
Dubitatio III: Whether it is lawful, in defense of one's own goods, to kill a thief
Dubitatio IV: Whether, in defense of Chastity, it is lawful to kill the Assailant
Quaestio VII: Whether, and how, MONOMACHIA (dueling) is illicit
Quaestio VIII: Whether it is lawful for a Husband to kill a Wife caught in adultery, and a father his daughter, and a brother his Sister, together with the seducer
Quaestio IX: Whether it is lawful to kill oneself
Dubitatio I: Whether it is lawful to shorten our life by mortifications
Dubitatio II: Whether, to avoid a sin or another evil, it is lawful to kill oneself
Dubitatio III: Whether, for the life of the neighbor, it is lawful to give oneself over to death
Dubitatio IV: When we are bound to die for the salvation of souls
Quaestio X: Whether a pregnant Mother may, to save her own life, procure the abortion of the fetus
Quaestio XI: On accidental Homicide
Quaestio XII: Whether a JUDGE can condemn an innocent man to death who has been proven guilty in the trial
Quaestio XIII: Whether Princes can grant license to kill outlaws
Quaestio XIV: On the Restitution owed on account of homicide, or mutilation
Quaestio XV: Whether the mutilation of a limb is ever lawful
Quaestio XVI: Whether it is lawful to imprison or beat another
Disputatio XXVI: On Theft, and Rapine
Quaestio I: What Dominion is
Quaestio II: Whether it is lawful to have private dominion over things
Quaestio III: What THEFT is
Quaestio IV: What quantity is required for mortal sin in Theft
Dubitatio I: What is the grave quantity of theft for Sons, Wives, and Religious
Quaestio V: Whether Theft is mortal when, from many tiny thefts, there supervenes a particle making the thing grave
Quaestio VI: Whether in extreme, or urgent, necessity it is lawful to take what belongs to another
Quaestio VII: On the Thefts of Religious
Quaestio VIII: Whether men can be reduced to slavery, and sold
Quaestio IX: Whether slaves can wrest themselves from their Masters
Quaestio X: Whether it is lawful, by private authority, to recover what is ours
Quaestio XI: On the punishment of Thieves
Quaestio XII: On the restitution of thefts
Disputatio XXVII: On the JUDGE
Quaestio I: Whether power is necessary in a JUDGE
Quaestio II: Whether a JUDGE ought to follow the truth, and therefore be wise
Quaestio III: Whether the acts of a JUDGE who has not a true but only a putative title are valid, such that not even he sins
Quaestio IV: Whether the POPE can subject himself to someone's judgment
Quaestio V: Whether goodness is necessary in a JUDGE
Quaestio VI: On the external purity of the hands of the Judge
Quaestio VII: Whether excommunicated JUDGES sin in judging, and judge invalidly
Quaestio VIII: On the order to be observed by a JUDGE
Dubitatio I: On the mode of proceeding by Denunciation
Dubitatio II: On the mode of proceeding by Accusation
Dubitatio III: On the mode of proceeding by Inquisition
Disputatio XXVIII: On the Accused
Quaestio I: On the bringing of the Accused to the Tribunal
Quaestio II: Whether the Accused is bound to confess a crime half-proven
Quaestio III: Whether an ACCUSED, infamed for one crime, can be interrogated also about others
Quaestio IV: Whether one convicted of a crime can be interrogated about hidden accomplices, of whom there is no infamy
Quaestio V: Whether an Accused, unjustly denying a true crime for which he was to be condemned to a pecuniary penalty, is bound to pay, and whether he is subject to restitution
Quaestio VI: Whether a Reus, unjustly denying the truth, is bound to retract before the end of the Trial, when he is to be condemned
Quaestio VII: Whether, if the Accused is interrogated again, he can give only a relative answer, saying: as I answered
Quaestio VIII: How the ACCUSED ought to conduct himself in the examination, when pressed by the Judge's iniquitous interrogations
Quaestio IX: Whether it is lawful for the ACCUSED to appeal to another Judge
Quaestio X: Whether, and how, the ACCUSED can defend himself
Quaestio XI: Whether the Accused can flee, and how, and when
Disputatio XXIX: ON WITNESSES
Quaestio I: Whether anyone is sometimes bound to bear witness
Quaestio II: Who can be WITNESSES in a trial
Quaestio III: On the Injustice of false Witnesses
Quaestio IV: What penalties are established for false Witnesses
Disputatio XXX: On the Advocate
Quaestio I: Who can, and ought, to exercise this office
Quaestio II: On the sins of a wicked Advocate
Quaestio III: Whether an ADVOCATE is bound on account of light fault
Quaestio IV: Whether an Advocate, engaged by the year, is worthy of his fee in that year in which he did nothing
Quaestio V: Whether an Advocate is bound to defend a Client gratis in grave necessity
Quaestio VI: Whether an Advocate can receive gifts
Disputatio XXXI: On the Notary and the Tabellion
Quaestio I: On the Justice, or Injustice, of the Notary and the Tabellion
Disputatio XXXII: On Contumely
Quaestio I: What Contumely is, and whence it arises
Quaestio II: How a Christian ought to conduct himself when assailed by contumelies
Disputatio XXXIII: On Detraction
Quaestio I: What Detraction is, and of how many kinds
Quaestio II: Whether detraction is a mortal sin
Quaestio III: Whether it is mortal to reveal a hidden crime to one, or two prudent men, who will keep silent about it
Quaestio IV: Whether material Detraction, which comes from talkativeness, is deadly
Quaestio V: Whether to be silent about a good that has been blackened is mortal
Quaestio VI: On the various cases in which detraction seems to be excused
Quaestio VII: Whether it is ever lawful to defame another with a falsehood, or to open his hidden crime
Quaestio VIII: Whether it is lawful to narrate a crime, notorious in one place, in another, where it is not known
Quaestio IX: Whether it is lawful to open someone's hidden crime to spare him torments
Quaestio X: Whether anyone can defame himself
Disputatio XXXIV: On Whispering, Mockery, and Cursing
Quaestio I: On the malice of Whispering
Quaestio II: On the malice of Mockery
Quaestio III: On Cursings
Tractatus II: E CONTRACTIBUS
Proemium I: Prooemium
Disputatio I: FIRST. On CONTRACTS in general
Quaestio I: What a CONTRACT is, and of how many kinds
Quaestio II: Whether for the validity of a Contract the intention of contracting, and of binding oneself, is required
Quaestio III: How Error, or fraud, vitiates a Contract
Quaestio IV: How fear voids a Contract
Quaestio V: On conditional Contracts
Quaestio VI: On the obligation that results from a valid Contract
Quaestio VII: Which persons can enter into a Contract, and which cannot
Quaestio VIII: Whether, and when, it is lawful to withdraw from a contract, the other party objecting
Disputatio II: On the acquisition of Dominion over Persons, and other things, through the Division of things Acquired
Quaestio I: By what right the first division, and subjection, of things was made
Quaestio II: On the acquisition of DOMINION over Barbarians
Quaestio III: On the acquisition of DOMINION over irrational creatures
Disputatio III: On Promise
Quaestio I: What a PROMISE is, and how it differs from a DONATION
Quaestio II: Whether a simple PROMISE, once accepted, binds in justice
Quaestio III: Whether a merely internal PROMISE, made to a man, binds
Quaestio IV: Whether an external Promise binds before it is accepted
Quaestio V: Whether a PROMISE binds when made for a base cause
Disputatio IV: ON DONATION
Quaestio I: What DONATION is, and of how many kinds
Quaestio II: Who can donate, and what
Quaestio III: On the revocations of donations
Disputatio V: On Buying, and Selling
Quaestio I: What EMPTIO (buying), and VENDITIO (selling), are
Quaestio II: Which persons can buy, and sell
Quaestio III: Which things can be sold
Quaestio IV: Of how many kinds is the price of things
Quaestio V: Whether, for certain causes, it is lawful to reduce below the minimum price, or raise above the maximum
Quaestio VI: Whether on account of ceasing profit, or emerging loss, the price can be raised above the maximum
Quaestio VII: Whether it is lawful to sell more dearly above the top price, awaiting payment, than with money paid down
Quaestio VIII: Whether Stocolia and Barocolia (Italian), Stocch (Spanish, MOHATRA) are lawful
Quaestio IX: To what extent Buying, and Selling, in Monopolies is illicit
Quaestio X: Whether the seller is bound to disclose a grave defect of the thing
Quaestio XI: Whether a thing sold, not yet delivered, perishes to the buyer
Quaestio XII: On the rescission of a sale, and purchase, on account of fraud etc.
Quaestio XIII: Whether a sale with a pact of buying back is lawful
Disputatio VI: On the loan and Usury
Quaestio I: What MUTUUM (loan) and USURY are, and why the latter is a sin
Quaestio II: Whether it is USURY to lend so that, when I have need, you lend back to me, or buy from me at a just price
Quaestio III: Whether it is lawful to lend with the pact that the one who receives the loan confer an office, or ecclesiastical benefice
Quaestio IV: Whether it is USURY to receive, beyond the principal, any other gain whatever besides the money
Quaestio V: Whether, and what, the lender can receive on account of danger, and ceasing profit
Quaestio VI: Whether it is lawful to lend wheat, or something else, with the pact that it be restored in the same measure, even if the price has risen at the time of restitution
Quaestio VII: Whether, and how, gain acquired from Usury is to be restored
Quaestio VIII: Whether it is lawful to seek a loan from a Usurer
Disputatio VII: ON CENSUSES (annuities)
Quaestio I: What a Census is, and of how many kinds
Quaestio II: Whether a Census can lawfully be sold
Quaestio III: From which things a CENSUS can be sold by natural law
Quaestio IV: Until what time a CENSUS can be sold
Quaestio V: What conditions are required for a CENSUS
Disputatio VIII: ON EXCHANGES
Quaestio I: What CAMBIUM (exchange) is, and of how many kinds
Quaestio II: Whether in petty exchange it is lawful to receive something above the value of the coin fixed by law
Quaestio III: Whether in local exchange, or by letters, when the first Campsor receives, so that he may restore elsewhere, he can gain something
Quaestio IV: Whether CAMBIUM is lawful, when for the Campsor a Procurator of the Campsor answers with the moneys of the Campsor himself
Quaestio V: Whether the said Recambia are lawful only on account of ceasing profit, or emerging loss
Quaestio VI: Whether the solutions, and provisions, that Money-changers receive are lawful
Disputatio IX: On the Contract of Partnership
Quaestio I: In what the CONTRACT OF PARTNERSHIP consists, and what is required that it be just
Quaestio II: Whether, and how, other contracts can be united with the Contract of Partnership
Quaestio III: Whether the contract by which, for secure capital, some certain gain is received annually is lawful
Disputatio X: On Emphyteusis, Letting, Hiring, and the Feud
Quaestio I: What EMPHYTEUSIS is
Quaestio II: What Locatio (letting) is
Quaestio III: What a FEUDUM (fief) is, and of how many kinds
Disputatio XI: On Testaments
Quaestio I: What a TESTAMENT is, and of how many kinds
Quaestio II: What solemnity is required for a Testament, closed and open
Quaestio III: Who can, and ought, to make testaments, or be instituted heirs
Quaestio IV: Whether an heir instituted in a testament invalid through defect of solemnity by civil law can pursue the inheritance in the forum of conscience, despoiling the heir succeeding ab intestato
Quaestio V: By what means a Testament is revocable
Quaestio VI: What obligation Heirs instituted by testament undertake
Disputatio XII: On Legacies
Quaestio I: What a Legacy is, and of how many kinds
Quaestio II: Whether legacies ought to be paid to all those for whom they are made, and how
Quaestio III: Which things can be bequeathed
Quaestio IV: What a Pious, or Privileged, Legacy is
Quaestio V: By what means legacies are caducous, such that the Heir is not bound to pay them
Tractatus III: E RELIGIONE
Proemium I: Prooemium
Disputatio I: FIRST. On RELIGION in general
Quaestio I: What the Virtue of RELIGION is
Quaestio II: Whether Religion is a Virtue
Quaestio III: Whether LATRIA, or RELIGION, is a special virtue
Quaestio IV: Whether RELIGION is a Cardinal Virtue
Quaestio V: How widely the acts of Religion extend
Quaestio VI: Whether RELIGION is necessary
Quaestio VII: Whether true RELIGION ought to be one
Disputatio II: ON DEVOTION
Quaestio I: What Devotion is, and of how many kinds
Disputatio III: ON PRAYER
Quaestio I: What Prayer is
Quaestio II: Of how many kinds is PRAYER
Quaestio III: Whether PRAYER is necessary
Quaestio IV: Whether Prayer is not only petitory, but also satisfactory, and meritorious
Quaestio V: What conditions are required for perfect Prayer
Quaestio VI: What is to be sought in Prayer: where the petitions of the Lord's Prayer are expounded
Quaestio VII: Who ought to pray
Quaestio VIII: Who is to be prayed to
Quaestio IX: For whom one ought to pray
Quaestio X: How one ought to pray
Quaestio XI: On that mode of praying, the Canonical Hours
Dubitatio I: Whether Attention is necessary for the Office to be recited by precept
Dubitatio II: Whether one reciting the Office satisfies by reciting another for it
Dubitatio III: Whether to interrupt the parts of the same Hour
Dubitatio IV: Whether one omitting all the hours of one Day commits more sins
Dubitatio V: Whether one reciting the Divine office in Choir with voice very much lowered, so that he is not heard, satisfies
Dubitatio VI: Whether Canons conversing in Choir are capable of distributions
Dubitatio VII: Whether one who recites the office privately ought to hear himself
Dubitatio VIII: Whether one who says the office with a notable cutting off, or truncating, of syllables satisfies
Dubitatio IX: Whether one who says a great part of the office with the mind not intending to satisfy satisfies
Dubitatio X: What is the gravity of the matter in the omission of a Canonical Hour
Disputatio IV: ON ADORATION
Quaestio I: Whether Latria is in the genus of some virtue
Quaestio II: Whether Latria is distinct from Dulia
Quaestio III: On Sacred places, destined for adorations
Disputatio V: ON SACRIFICE
Quaestio I: What a SACRIFICE is
Quaestio II: What is required that a SACRIFICE be right
Quaestio III: Whether Sacrifice is of natural law
Quaestio IV: Whether besides Sacrifice, first-fruits are to be offered
Disputatio VI: On Tithes
Quaestio I: Whether Tithes are to be paid
Quaestio II: From which things tithes are to be paid
Quaestio III: To whom, and by whom tithes are to be paid
Quaestio IV: Where, and when, Tithes are to be paid
Quaestio V: By what authority the payment of tithes is to be exacted
Tractatus IV: E VOTIS
Proemium I: Prooemium
Disputatio I: FIRST. ON THE VOW
Quaestio I: What a VOW is, and what its conditions are
Quaestio II: What deliberation is required for a VOW
Quaestio III: Whether one promising something to God, and knowing the obligation, yet having the intention of not binding himself, is bound by Vow
Quaestio IV: Whether a Votive promise is made to God alone
Quaestio V: How error, or ignorance, concerning a VOW causes involuntariness
Quaestio VI: Whether fear inflicted makes a Vow invalid
Quaestio VII: Whether a necessary thing can be the matter of a Vow
Quaestio VIII: Whether a VOW is only about some good
Quaestio IX: Whether a VOW is only about a better good, or truly also about a lesser good
Quaestio X: Whether a VOW about a thing that can have a good, and an evil, outcome is valid
Quaestio XI: Whether any obligation arises from a VOW, and what it is
Whether any obligation arises from a VOW, and what sort it is.
It is certain that a vow binds under sin to its fulfillment, as D. Bonaventure notes in Speculum animae, cap. 3, long after the middle, and first from Prov. c. 20, and Deut. 23, and 1 Tim. 5, and Ps. 75: Vow, and render to God, where the Gloss explains it: To vow is of the will; but to render is of necessity, as D. Bonaventure notes there. That it binds under mortal sin, Innocent III defines in cap. Licet, de Voto. So all Catholics hold.
The parents of the heretics of this age, Luther and Calvin, most bitter enemies of religion, are not ashamed to do away with even the most solemn vows.1
FIRST they teach that Vows for the worship of God cannot be made except about things commanded; hence there is one common vow of the faithful, which we make in Baptism.
SECOND they teach that Vows about things not commanded can be made, if not for the worship of God, at least for carrying on the affairs of this life, or for avoiding sins.
THIRD, that the vows of monks are impious and void: this Luther teaches de votis monasticis, and Calvin lib. 4, Institut. cap. 13. Nor do they teach dissimilarly the Augustan Confession, art. 27, and the Confession of Württemberg, c. de votis monast., whom Bellarmine reports lib. 2, de Monach. cap. 15.
Peter Martyr, in his book on celibacy and monastic vows, says two things contrary to Luther. One is that all vows are to be reckoned among the Jewish ceremonies and are therefore abrogated; the other is that no vow is made in Baptism. As to monastic vows, he censures them with no less insolence.
I ASSERT first, that Vows pertain to the worship of God even about things not commanded.
It is PROVED first from Isaiah 19: In that day the Egyptians shall know the Lord, and shall worship him in victims and gifts: and they shall make vows, and shall perform them.
It is PROVED second, from Bellarmine following D. Bonaventure in 4 Sent., dist. 28, q. 1, art. 2: every honorable thing, even of the supererogation of virtue, is of itself acceptable to God: therefore also when offered by vow. The antecedent is proved from D. Bonaventure from Luke 2, where it is said that that Anna dwelt in the temple, serving God night and day; where the Greek has λατρεύουσα, which properly signifies worship, as D. Bonaventure indicates there on that passage, officiously rendering it, she was devoted, and devout toward God. The consequence is proved from D. Thomas, because by a vow one is established in good.
It is PROVED also from the Socratic Doctor in lib. 1, Pharetrae, cap. 38, where, following D. Gregory in Moralia 15, cap. 12, he calls virginity obsequium Deo, "an obsequy to God"; and D. Augustine in lib. de virginitate, cap. 27, where he describes the obsequy of virgins toward God, for they follow the Lamb; and from Cyprian de disciplina et habitu virginum, where he teaches that virgins are far and diametrically alien from the worship of the earth, because they follow Christ. See other things there.
It is PROVED third from the Scriptures, wherein it is found that the saints made vows about things not commanded. So Jacob in Genesis 28, where he first made a vow, promising God tithes of all things, and to raise upon it a stone house of God, if God had granted good fortune to his journey. But if these things had been commanded, Jacob would ill have done them under the condition of a prosperous journey. In 1 Kings 1, Anna vowed in the same spirit her son, if it should be given her by the Lord. So in 1 Paralipomenon 29, David vowed most many treasures together with his subjects for the temple to be built for the Lord, and it is written: The people rejoiced, when they promised their vows willingly: because they offered all with their whole heart to the Lord: and David the king also rejoiced with a great joy. Indeed, not even David himself heaped up so many treasures by command. So in 2 Paralipomenon 31, the children of Israel offered many animals, which they had vowed spontaneously, not by command. In 3 Esdras, Artaxerxes offered what he had vowed spontaneously. In Jonah 1, the men who were in the ship vowed to God, that they might be delivered from shipwreck; Heliodorus, in 2 Machabees 3, vowed many things for his own deliverance. The Blessed Virgin spontaneously offered and vowed virginity, as is said in Luke 1: How shall this be done, because I know not a man? as the holy Fathers testify: Gregory of Nyssa in his oration on the nativity of the Lord; Augustine in lib. de sancta virginitate, cap. 4; Bede on cap. 1 of Luke; Anselm in lib. de excellentia virginis, cap. 4; Rupert in lib. 3 in Cant.; Bernard in sermone 4 super Missus est; D. Bonaventure on Luke 1, and in the Biblia pauperum, cap. 25, where he also enumerates as vows all the things said above.
Calvin most immodestly dares to bark in the Commentary on this passage found in Marloratus, first rebuking the Most Blessed Virgin for infidelity, of whom Elizabeth cried out: Blessed art thou that hast believed, though the holy Fathers, on this passage, cry out with one voice that she never wavered in faith.
Next he rebukes the holy Fathers as absurdly and ridiculously gathering from this the vow of the Blessed Virgin, because (he says) if she had had a vow of virginity, she would have mocked Joseph by taking him as her husband, with great perfidy toward him, and to the mocking of God.
But the wisest Fathers thence solidly deduced the vow; for she alleges her difficulty in conceiving, because she will not know a man. And indeed she could, in harmony with Joseph after the betrothal and before the salutation of the Angel, have vowed virginity — upon which the whole edifice of Calvin collapses.
Yet I will never grant Calvin that the Blessed Virgin at any time had the mind of consummating the marriage; otherwise she would have been a virgin only in body, not in soul, as Bellarmine indicates in lib. 2, de Monachis, cap. 22, after D. Bonaventure in 4 dist. 30, dub. 5, litt. et quaest. 2.
Therefore it is answered with D. Bonaventure in the cited question that the Blessed Virgin before the betrothal had vowed virginity absolutely, and in this Scotus follows him in 4 dist. 30, quaest. 2. The same say Albert the Great de laudibus Virginis, and before them the holy Fathers Gregory of Nyssa and Augustine in the places adduced; nevertheless she had received a revelation concerning Saint Joseph, that he would never seek the conjugal debt, and therefore she confidently associated him with herself for most honorable causes, which we shall relate in the Treatise on Matrimony. She therefore entrusted the Most Blessed body to a spouse who could have consummated the marriage; yet she was certain that he would never wish to do so. But she was betrothed while the divine Spirit breathed upon her, which is sufficient for the reason of matrimony, as Bellarmine notes in the cited place, and Sanchez proves lib. 2, de Matrimonio, disp. 28.
Otherwise Calvin objects conjectures from his own inverted fantasy, namely that the Virgin spoke thus out of excess of mind, because she was about to conceive the Son of God, and therefore to exclude the embrace of a man — not that she had a vow of virginity.
But Calvin rashly prefers his conjectures to the assertion of so many Fathers. Nor does he sufficiently gather that it was said out of admiration; for the Angel answers the doubt, saying: The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, etc., as D. Bonaventure notes on that passage, and Bellarmine after him. As if the Angel should say (the Socratic Doctor says): You ask how you shall conceive? To this I answer, that you shall be made fruitful without corruption; you shall conceive without lust; you shall bring forth without pain, not from the seed of man, but by the power of the Holy Spirit.
But what Bellarmine adds, that the Blessed Virgin did not yet think herself to be the mother of God, does not please me; for in the preceding words the Angel had expressed it: This shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Most High, etc.
Peter Martyr objects further that from those words the vow of the Blessed Virgin is not gathered, just as when Moses says in Exodus 6: How shall Pharaoh hear me, seeing I am of uncircumcised lips? and yet we would not gather that Moses vowed the circumcision of his lips. So in John 3 Nicodemus says: How can a man be born, when he is old? and yet from that you would not gather that he vowed old age: therefore neither is it gathered from similar words in the Blessed Virgin. These things, however, are senseless and frivolous: for the proposition of Nicodemus was whether a man could be born corporeally again and renew his life, which is impossible; he himself understood regeneration carnally, as proposed to him by the Lord; therefore he sets up a thing impossible and not depending on free will: How can these things be done? as D. Bonaventure notes on John 3. So Moses sets up an impediment to speaking which is necessary from nature; but the Blessed Virgin sets up an impediment depending on free will, namely to be joined to a man in marriage. But if she objects: How shall this be, because she was prohibited by the law — not indeed by the universal law, as is clear: therefore by the proper law of the Vow.
He objects further that the Virgin answered prudently, even though not bound by a vow — namely, if the birth were to come about in the ordinary way, it stood in the way that she was not yet mingled with a man; but if in a higher manner, she asks to be instructed.
But he explains it foolishly thus; for since the Angel brings in the future conception, what does it matter that she was not yet mingled with a man? It was enough to be mingled afterward; but if it was to be done in a higher manner, to set up the natural mode would have been beside the point.
Now I return to our proposition. The vows narrated in the Scriptures were about things not commanded, and yet the Lord required them as most pleasing to himself, as is written in Deut. 23 and Ps. 75: Vow, and render, as Saint Bonaventure weighs it in Speculo animae, cap. 3.
I assert second, that Vows do not pertain to Jewish ceremonies.
It is PROVED first from the cited place of Isaiah, which the holy Fathers Jerome, Cyril, and others interpret of Christians.
It is PROVED second from D. Bonaventure in 4 dist. 38, art. 2, quaest. 3, from that verse of the Psalm soon adduced: Vow, and render to the Lord, which Saint Doctor proves to be understood of us from the Gloss, which says: To vow is of the will, but to render is of necessity. The same Saint Augustine has here. Hence the heretic's response collapses, that the speech was to the Jews.
It is PROVED third from D. Bonaventure in 4 dist. 38, dub. 4, litt., from that passage, cap. 5 of the former Epistle to Timothy, where of certain widows he says: When they have been wanton in Christ, they will marry: having damnation, because they have made void their first faith. In which place by first faith all the Greek and Latin interpreters understand the vow of continence. Hence Saint Augustine on the cited place of Psalm 75, Vow, and render, says: Let each one vow what he can, render it, and be not slothful to vow: for you shall not fulfill it by your own strength, and then, expounding the place of the Apostle, says: What is, they have made void their first faith? They vowed, and did not render.
This the Fourth Council of Carthage expounds, which consisted of 214 Bishops, in canon one hundred and four. And the Fourth Council of Toledo, which consisted of seventy Bishops.
The same three most holy supreme Pontiffs expound with this reasoning: Clement in lib. 3, Constit. cap. 1 et 2; Innocent I in epistola secunda, cap. 13; Gelasius I in epistola 1, cap. 23. Likewise Tertullian in lib. de monogamia, not far from the end; Basil in lib. de Virginitate, past the middle; Jerome in lib. 1 in Jovin., and on cap. 44 of Ezech.; Epiphanius in haeresi 48; Augustine in lib. de sancta Virginitate, cap. 23, and lib. de bono viduitatis, cap. 8 et 9, and the cited place on Ps. 75; Fulgentius in epistola 1. Besides these also all the expositors thus, both the Greeks, as Chrysostom, Theodoret, Theophylact, and Oecumenius; and the Latins, as Ambrose, Primasius, Bede, Haymo, Sedulius, Anselm, D. Bonaventure, and others.
Luther de votis monasticis answers that by the first faith is to be understood, not the vow — which nowhere is taken under the name of faith — but the Christian faith; which those widows had lost, who, that they might more easily be permitted to marry, fell away from the Christian faith. Therefore he says they went after Satan, and raged wantonly against Christ.
But this interpretation is audacious; and indeed that the promise is meant by faith, D. Bonaventure shows from D. Gregory to Boniface, which is found in 17 quaest. 1, cap. Viduae a proposito, which he also condemns with Apostolic authority, as is related in the text of dist. 38, cap. 1. The same Saint Bonaventure observes in 3 dist. 23, dub. 2, adducing this passage for the keeping of a promise, where he notes it is also taken for the fidelity of a promise owed: Jerem. 7, Fidelity is perished; and of the saint, as is said of Joseph in Gen. 44: I received him into my fidelity; so in Rom. 3 it is said: Shall their unbelief make the faith of God of none effect?
But what he says, that they fell away from the faith in order to marry, is false; for even Christian widows could marry, as the Apostle says in 1 Corinth. 7. But to go after Satan, and to wanton against Christ, aptly signifies the sacrilege of the sin of lust.
Calvin's instance was also similar to these, who adds another exposition: that these widows promised continence, but could not licitly unless they were sixty years old, at which time they are no longer fit for marriage. Therefore the Apostle says: Let a widow be chosen no less than sixty years of age; this therefore makes nothing toward establishing the vows of religious women, who vow even in the flower of their age.
But why does the Apostle rebuke them, if they made void their vows, or if the vows did not bind? Truly the time of sixty years was not prefixed to the vow when making it, but either to the office of a deaconess, as Tertullian says de velandis virginibus, and lib. 1 ad Uxorem, and others; or to admission into the number of those widows who were to be fed from the alms of the Church, as Chrysostom and Ambrose expound here, and Jerome in his epistle to Salvina.
Calvin's THIRD answer is, that that promise was not a vow made to God, but a pledge to the Church not to marry, that they might more freely discharge the office of deaconesses.
But the Fathers say the opposite: that if the pledge had been made to the Church alone, it could easily have been dispensed.
They INSTANCE: the Apostle there says: I will that the younger marry.
It is ANSWERED that he says this by way of indulgence, not of command, as he himself testifies. But of this below.
Peter Martyr says this passage is ambiguous, because it is expounded in many ways, and therefore is not fit for doctrine; then he says it sounds not of damnation, but of a certain infamy, or accusation, or mark, because they did not persevere; and he draws this from Bucer.
But all the holy Fathers expound a true eternal damnation of those widows who married after the vow; and in this sense the Apostle everywhere takes damnation before God and men, Rom. 3 and 13.
Moreover, John also in cap. 3 uses the same word κρῖμα not once but thrice: The Son of Man came not to judge the world — which signifies not a judgment of discussion, but of damnation, as Saint Bonaventure rightly notes there.
Then he admits it: why were those widows infamous for marrying, if they were hindered by no vow?
I ASSERT lastly, that Baptism is not a vow. So D. Bonaventure in 4 dist. 38, quaest. 2, ad primum, and commonly the Thomists on the same distinction.
It is PROVED from Bellarmine cap. 19, lib. 2, de Monach., with the argument of Saint Bonaventure: Vows must be spontaneous. So Deut. 23: If thou hast made a vow, thou shalt not delay to render it: for the Lord will require it. And if thou delay, it shall be reckoned to thee for sin. If thou wilt not promise, thou shalt be without sin. But the promise made in Baptism is necessary, nor can it be said of it: if thou wilt not promise, thou shalt be without sin; for all are bound by divine law to receive Baptism. It is CONFIRMED: vows made for little ones by their parents are not valid unless they be afterward confirmed by those very ones in whose name they were made, when they come to adult age, as D. Bernard teaches in his epistle to Robert; but the promise made in Baptism binds little ones even if made through others: therefore.
It is CONFIRMED from Bellarmine following D. Bonaventure, because since it is neither necessary nor very useful to vow the commandments, it is not credible that God wished to bind us to these.
You will OBJECT first, against the first assertion: every voluntary worship cannot please God, from Col. 2, where the Greek has voluntary worship for every superstition, and Rom. 14: Whatsoever is not of faith is sin; but of faith we do not have that this worship pleases God: therefore.
It is ANSWERED that the Apostle here rebukes certain worships invented gratuitously, without order to the divine obsequy — such as were the frequent washings of the Jews, and now of the Turks, who ascend to prayer washed many times over; for these worships are rebuked elsewhere by the Apostle, and by Christ in Luke 11, as Saint Bonaventure observes on that passage; but this worship, which the Socratic Doctor in 4 dist. 13, dub. 4 calls standing and long-lasting, he rebukes as an ancient error.
That of Rom. 14 is understood of him who acts not from conscience; for thus faith is taken here, as Saint Bonaventure notes in 3 dist. 23, dub. 2, and elsewhere passim; and this is the common exposition, as Bellarmine notes.
The Pseudo-Martyr OBJECTS second, against the second assertion, because in the new testament the name of vow is not found, nor need it be; for in Baptism we profess the faith of Christ — what need, then, of vows about it? For so evangelical liberty is diminished by vows. Nay, injury is done to God, making necessary what he himself made free.
It is ANSWERED easily, that in the new testament the reality of the vow is found, as we saw above. Rightly indeed are we said to have received all things from God, and to give them to God, as the Council of Orange says in can. 11, because they are delivered over to our power; for God receives these for his own obsequy, as D. Bonaventure says in quaest. 1 et 2. Nor is evangelical liberty violated, which frees not from a law to be observed, but from sin, as the Apostle says Rom. 6. Nor is any injury done to God, for he shows himself delighted by these things.
He OBJECTS third, against the third assertion: Christians sin more gravely by violating the law than do the heathen.
It is ANSWERED that they are punished more gravely on account of the guilt of an ungrateful mind.
They OBJECT fourth, D. Augustine on Ps. 75, where he says, we have vowed the divine law.
D. Bonaventure ANSWERS on cap. 1 of the Rule, that there to vow is taken broadly; and if it be taken strictly, already the heretics hear that they are held by the law of God; for there he speaks thus: Vow, and render to the Lord your God, all of you in common. What ought we to vow? To believe in him, to hope from him for eternal life, to live well according to the common manner. For there is a certain manner common to all: not to steal, not to commit adultery; not to love violence; not to be proud; not to kill a man, not to hate a brother, not to weave mischief against anyone. All these we ought all to vow. Have you heard, sectaries, Augustine? Does he patronize you in this way?
They OBJECT fifth: the Church compels the baptized to keep the law, but not the heathen or the Jews: therefore in Baptism they contracted some special obligation.
It is ANSWERED that he compels them to keep it insofar as they have been made sons and members of the Church; for members are subject to the head, and the son to his parents.
There remains now to see from what virtue this obligation arises.
I ASSERT fourth, that it arises from the virtue of Religion.
It is PROVED from D. Bonaventure in 4 dist. 38, passim, because by a vow something is promised to be done in obsequy of God, which is the formal object of religion.
But it is called an act of Justice IMPROPERLY by D. Thomas 2 p., quaest. 80, art. 1, insofar as religion is a potential part of justice. Nor can anyone, by title of justice, bind himself to God by vowing, because between God and us true justice cannot intercede, as I showed in the first part of the first part, Tract. 1, disp. 17, quaest. 1. So Sanchez lib. 4, cap. 11, num. 8.