Palladium theologicum, Tomus quintus: De virtutibus

Gaudenzio da Brescia

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

Quaestio XII: Whether the immature are bound by Vows

Quaestio XIII: What, and what kind of, is the power of invalidating VOWS

Quaestio XIV: On the power of the Prelates of Religious to invalidate VOWS

Quaestio XV: Whether a husband can invalidate all the Vows of his wife, beyond the Vow of chastity

Quaestio XVI: Whether a husband can invalidate the Vow of Chastity emitted by his wife without license, the marriage standing, and to be fulfilled then

Quaestio XVII: Whether a Husband can invalidate the Vows of his Wife, emitted without his license, to be fulfilled at the time the marriage is dissolved

Quaestio XVIII: Whether a husband can invalidate the Vows of his wife, emitted before marriage

Quaestio XIX: *Whether the Vows of a wife, made without the license of the husband, revive when the marriage is dissolved.*

Quaestio XX: *Whether a husband can invalidate the Vows of his wife emitted by his license: the Vow of Chastity excepted.*

Quaestio XXI: Whether a husband can revoke the Vow of Chastity of his wife, emitted by his license

Quaestio XXII: Whether a Husband can invalidate the Vows of his Wife, emitted under the preceding dominion of a father, or first husband

Quaestio XXIII: Whether a Wife can invalidate certain vows of her husband, and which

Quaestio XXIV: Whether parents, or Tutors, can invalidate all the Vows of their immature Sons

Quaestio XXV: Whether a Father, and Curator, can invalidate the personal Vows of their adolescent sons

Quaestio XXVI: Which real, or mixed, Vows of adolescents can be invalidated by the father

Quaestio XXVII: To whom the faculty of invalidating the Vows of adolescents, and the immature, belongs

Quaestio XXVIII: Which Vows of servants the Lords can invalidate

Quaestio XXIX: Whether in the Church there is power to dispense from Vows

Quaestio XXX: Whether a cause is required for a dispensation, and which

Quaestio XXXI: Whether, and how, the commutation of Vows is to be made

Quaestio XXXII: Whether commutation requires a cause

Question XXXIII

Disputatio II: SECOND. ON THE STATE OF RELIGION, OR ON SOLEMN VOWS

§ I: On the vows of Religious in common

Quaestio I: In what solemn vows differ from simple vows

Quaestio II: Whether solemn VOWS are necessary for the state of a Religious

Quaestio III: Whether, and how, this state is Holy

Quaestio IV: Whether the three vows of Poverty, Chastity, and Obedience are essential to Religion

Quaestio V: Whether the Pontiff can dispense in solemn Vows

Quaestio VI: Who are to be received into Religion

Quaestio VII: On NOVICES

Quaestio VIII: What is required for profession in Religion

Quaestio IX: Whether, and how, Religious are bound to perfection

Quaestio X: Whence the greater perfection of Religion is to be taken

Quaestio XI: On passing to another Religion

Quaestio XII: Whether the three vows of Poverty, Chastity, and Obedience are essential to Religion

Quaestio XIII: Whether the Pontiff can dispense in solemn Vows

Quaestio XIV: Who are to be received into Religion

Quaestio XV: On Novices

Quaestio XVI: What is required for profession in Religion

Quaestio XVII: Whether, and how, Religious are bound to perfection

Quaestio XVIII: Whence the greater perfection of Religion is to be taken

Quaestio XIX: On passing to another Religion

Quaestio XX: On Religious to be expelled

Quaestio XXI: Whether every Religious is bound to all the counsels

Quaestio XXII: Whether Religious ought to teach, preach, etc.

Quaestio XXIII: Whether Religious ought to labor with their hands

Quaestio XXIV: Whether it is lawful for Religious to transact secular business

Disputatio III: On the Vow of OBEDIENCE

Quaestio I: Whether the vow of obedience is chief among the Religious vows

Quaestio II: What obedience is promised in Religion

Quaestio III: Whether Religious are bound to obey Prelates in all things

Quaestio IV: Whether one doubting whether the thing commanded is lawful is bound to obey the Prelate

Quaestio V: Whether all the statutes of Religious Orders bind under sin

Disputatio IV: On the Vow of Poverty

Quaestio I: On the essence of this Vow

Quaestio II: Which Poverty is more excellent

Quaestio III: Whether mendicancy befits Religious Poverty

Quaestio IV: Whether Religious, on account of Poverty, ought to be clothed in mean garments

Quaestio V: Whether austere fare is owed to Religious Poverty

Quaestio VI: How Poverty is violated

Dubitatio I: Whether Prelates can concede to Religious an annual peculium

Dubitatio II: Whether a Religious, having superfluities by license of his superior, is a proprietor

Dubitatio III: Dubitatio III

Dubitatio IV: Whether a Legacy stands for a Religious, as pertaining to him precisely

Quaestio VII: On the penalties, and marks, of a Proprietor

Disputatio V: On the Vow of CHASTITY

Quaestio I: What difference there is between Cloistered, and Clerical, chastity

Quaestio II: From what time the solemn vow of Chastity began to dissolve a subsequent marriage

Quaestio III: Whether one vowing Chastity solemnly dissolves a marriage, whether consummated, or ratified, and by what law, and at what time this began to be done

Quaestio IV: By what law, and at what time, Religious Chastity began to be sealed with cloister

Quaestio V: By what means cloister is violated

Quaestio VI: Whether dispensation can fall upon Religious chastity, and who can dispense in cloister

Disputatio VI: On the Oath

Quaestio I: What an OATH is, and of how many kinds

Quaestio II: Whether it is lawful to swear by GOD

Quaestio III: Whether it is lawful to swear by creatures

Quaestio IV: What is required for an Oath

Quaestio V: Whether, and how, it is a Sin to swear without Truth

Quaestio VI: Whether, and what sin, is an OATH made without justice

Quaestio VII: Whether, and what sin, is an OATH lacking judgment

Quaestio VIII: Whether, and how, a custom of swearing is evil

Quaestio IX: When precisely one swearing incautiously from custom sins mortally

Quaestio X: What sin it is to swear dolosely

Quaestio XI: Whether it is lawful to require an Oath from a perjurer

Quaestio XII: Whether, and when, it is lawful to require an Oath from an Idolater

Quaestio XIII: On the obligation of a promissory Oath in itself

Quaestio XIV: Whether dolous Oaths bind

Quaestio XV: Whether an Oath extorted by injury, as of paying usuries, binds

Quaestio XVI: Whether an Oath extorted by fear binds

Quaestio XVII: Whether someone's Oath, by fraud, or error, or ignorance, is void

Quaestio XVIII: Whether an incautious promissory Oath binds

Quaestio XIX: Whether an Oath confirms contracts that could otherwise be voided

Quaestio XX: On the means of removing the obligation of an Oath

Quaestio XXI: On the Penalties imposed upon Perjuries

Disputatio VII: On Adjuration

Quaestio I: What ADJURATION is, and by what means it is made

Quaestio II: Whom it is lawful to adjure

Disputatio VIII: On Divine Praises

Quaestio I: NICA. On the Nature, and quality, of Divine praises

Disputatio IX: On the Observance of Feast Days

Quaestio I: On the origin of FEAST days

Quaestio II: Whose it is to institute FEASTS to be observed under mortal sin

Quaestio III: Whether mortal sins on a Feast are forbidden by this precept

Quaestio IV: Whether licit liberal work becomes servile because it is done for gain

Quaestio V: Which are servile works, forbidden on the Feast day

Dubitatio I: Which works are forbidden by Canon law on a feast

Quaestio VI: That a time of servile labor induces a grave transgression of the FEAST

Quaestio VII: On the causes excusing from violation of the Feast

Quaestio VIII: Whether, having merely heard a SACRED (sermon), it is forbidden to idle the whole Feast day

Disputatio X: On Superstition

Quaestio I: SUPERSTITION, what it is, and of how many kinds

Quaestio II: On Divination by the Stars

Quaestio III: On Divination by the Elements, and other mixed things

Quaestio IV: On Divination from Dreams

Quaestio V: On Sortileges

Quaestio VI: On superstitious observances for works

Quaestio VII: On the malefices of Witches

Quaestio VIII: Whether it is lawful to consult Witches, that at least the malefices be removed

Quaestio IX: On the penalties of Witches, etc.

Disputatio XI: ON THE TEMPTATION OF GOD

Quaestio I: What TEMPTATION is, and of how many kinds

Disputatio XII: ON SACRILEGE

Quaestio I: What Sacrilege is, and of how many kinds

Disputatio XIII: ON SIMONY

Quaestio I: What SIMONY is, and of how many kinds

Quaestio II: How Simony is recognized on the part of the object

Quaestio III: In what way Simony is committed on the part of the act of exchange itself

Quaestio IV: On the Penalties of Simoniacs

Disputatio XIV: ON THE OTHER VIRTUES ANNEXED TO JUSTICE

§ I: ON PIETY

Quaestio I: What PIETY is, and what kind of Virtue

Quaestio II: What reverence is to be shown to Parents

Quaestio III: What obedience is to be shown to Parents by Sons

Quaestio IV: How, and when, Sons are bound to relieve Parents

Quaestio V: On the obligation of Parents toward Sons

Quaestio VI: In which cases Parents can disinherit Sons

Quaestio VII: Whether Sons can ever refuse aliment to Parents, and disinherit them

Quaestio VIII: To what a Woman is bound, who has a Son from adultery, or has substituted one

Quaestio IX: On the mutual obligation of Servants, and Masters

Quaestio X: On the obligation of Brothers toward Brothers, and Sisters, and conversely

§ II: On Observance, Reverence, and Dulia

Quaestio I: On Observance, and Reverence

Quaestio II: On Dulia

§ III: ON OBEDIENCE, and DISOBEDIENCE

Quaestio I: On Observance, and Reverence

Quaestio II: On DISOBEDIENCE

§ IV: ON GRATITUDE, and VINDICATION, and the Vices opposed to them

Quaestio I: On GRATITUDE

Quaestio II: On INGRATITUDE

Quaestio III: On Vindication

§ V: On Truth, Friendship, Liberality, Epikeia, and the vices opposed to them: On the gift of Piety, and the Precepts of the Decalogue pertaining to Justice

Quaestio I: On TRUTH

Quaestio II: On the LIE

Dubitatio I: What a Lie is

Dubitatio II: Of how many kinds is a Lie

Dubitatio III: Whether every lie is intrinsically a sin

Dubitatio IV: Whether a Lie is mortal of its genus

Dubitatio V: Whether every Lie is mortal for perfect men

Dubitatio VI: Whether among the degrees of Lie there is a most grave, and a most light

Dubitatio VII: On the others that are reduced to Lying

Quaestio III: On Friendship

Quaestio IV: On Liberality

Dubitatio I: On Avarice

Dubitatio II: On PRODIGALITY

Quaestio V: On EPIKEIA

Quaestio VI: On the GIFT OF PIETY

Tractatus V: E VIRTUTE FORTITUDINIS

Proemium I: Prooemium

Disputatio I: FIRST. ON FORTITUDE

ABOUT to treat of Fortitude, I shall institute the chief question concerning Martyrdom, which is the most excellent act of this virtue; for he is strongest who does not doubt to spend his life for Christ, and takes upon himself the whole forces of the Tyrant, and triumphs though conquered. I shall then treat of certain companions and auxiliary troops of this virtue, with which it defends itself against the vices adverse to it: for against Presumption, Ambition, and empty Glory fights that great-souled virtue, hence called MAGNANIMITY; but at its back stands Pusillanimity, against which it also aims some blows: there follow Magnificence, Patience, and Perseverance. All these attend Fortitude at its side, and enter hostile engagements with the vices opposed to them, as I shall say here as briefly as possible: this is the whole matter and series of this twofold disputation which I shall bring forth on FORTITUDE; but first I shall examine whether it is a Virtue, and of what kind.

Quaestio I: Whether FORTITUDE is a Virtue, and which

WHETHER FORTITUDE is a Virtue, and what it is.

I ASSERT first, that Fortitude is a virtue. It is the teaching of St. Augustine lib. de moribus Ecclesiae, cap. 15. and of Aristotle 3. Eth.

IT IS PROVED by St. Bonavent. first ad 8. Sap. where under the name of Virtue it is counted among the other moral Virtues.

IT IS PROVED secondly by the Holy Doctor in Diaeta, tit. 5. cap. 7. That which makes a man morally good is a virtue: Such is fortitude: Therefore. The major is Aristotle's 2. Eth. cap. 6. the minor is proved, because it removes the impediments that repel one from rectitude, which are the difficulties opposed. So it is had in Proverb. 31. Who shall find a valiant woman? etc. She hath sent her hand to strong things 2 fortitude, and her garment is comeliness. The Holy Doctor proves this by the examples of the Apostles, who, having received through the Holy Spirit the virtue and gift of fortitude, confronted Tyrants Act. 1. and he shows the same of the holy Martyrs, especially the Virgins, Catherine, Cecilia, Agnes, and others, who went rejoicing to prisons and to tortures. Because, namely, they were strengthened by God. For fortitude is from heaven, as is said in 1 Machab. 3. See the Holy Doctor.

HENCE again this assertion is proved in the opusc. de septem itiner. aeternitatis, dist. 5. because it gives strength for overcoming the perils opposed to rectitude, and the very punishments and deaths, and for hastening intrepidly toward the virtues. It proves the assumption in the opusc. de septem Donis, de Dono fortitudinis, cap. 1. from Aristotle 3. Eth. cap. 8. and 9. where he says: He is brave who does not fear terrible things, and endures, as he ought, for the sake of good, and from Paulinus to Jerome, where he says: He who is truly brave neither dares rashly nor fears imprudently, and from St. Augustine lib. 5. de civit. cap. 17. where he relates that many underwent death bravely for the good of the Republic, and from Tully de offic. where he says there were two precepts of Plato, for those wishing to benefit the Republic. The first, that they so uphold the citizens' welfare that whatever they do they refer to it, forgetful of their own advantages. The second precept is that they care for the whole body of the Republic principally, not merely uphold some part while deserting the rest; and therefore this fortitude is ordered to an end that is within the limits of nature.

IT IS PROVED by the Holy Doctor thirdly in Compend. Theol. lib. 5. cap. 36. from Macrobius lib. 1. in somn. Scipionis, cap. 8. for fortitude raises the mind above perils, teaches one to fear nothing but what is base, not to dread the onset of death, and to summon the tamed passions intrepidly to virtue.

NEXT, because it has marvelous effects; for it makes men victorious against the enemies of God, as is said in 1 Machab. 6. Secondly it preserves a man's own goods: When the strong man is armed, etc. Thirdly, because it enriches with goods, Proverb. 10. The hand of the strong hath prepared riches. Fourthly it storms the kingdom of heaven, Matth. 11. The violent take it by force. Fifthly it adorns, Proverb. 31. Fortitude, and her garment is comeliness. Sixthly it secures one in extremities, Proverb. 30. The lion, mightiest of beasts, will fear no one's approach. Seventhly it awaits a recompense, Proverb. 31. Who shall find a valiant woman? Afar, and from the uttermost coasts, is the price of her, etc.

IT IS PROVED fourthly by St. Bonavent. in Pharetra, lib. 2. cap. 31. for it moderates and reduces to the norm of honesty the passions of Fear and Daring, and that in regard to the most difficult objects, namely, the perils of death. It proves the assumption from the Fathers.

St. GREGORY 7. Moral. cap. 8. says: The fortitude of the implanted is to conquer the flesh, to withstand one's own pleasures, to extinguish the delight of the present life, to love the hardships of this world for the sake of earthly things, to despise the allurements of prosperity, to overcome in heart the fear of adversity. The same is had in lib. 4. cap. 30. and lib. 5. cap. 13.

St. JEROME, lib. 16. in Isa. cap. 57. Fortitude, and constancy is the royal road; from which he declines to the right who is rash and pertinacious: to the left, he who is fearful and timorous.

St. AUGUSTINE epist. 19. ad Hieronymum: He who is truly strong in virtue neither dares rashly nor fears imprudently.

St. AMBROSE lib. 1. de offic. cap. 30. he is brave who consoles himself in some sorrow: And truly it is rightly called fortitude, when each one conquers himself, restrains his anger, is softened and swayed by no enticements, is not disturbed by adversity, is not exalted by prosperity, and is not carried about, as it were by a wind, by the change of varied affairs. The same is had in cap. 39. and lib. 5. in Lucam, cap. 6.

SENECA, epist. 59. The wise man and the brave man is fortified and intent against every onrush; if poverty, if grief, if ignominy, if pain makes its assault, he will not give ground, undaunted, but will go against those things, and stand amid them.

IT IS OBSERVED, however, by the Holy Doctor in the places alleged, with St. Thom. ad 1. ex Aristotele 3. Eth. cap. 8. that others exercise acts of the virtue of fortitude that are not true, but like it.

I ASSERT secondly: Fortitude is a special virtue. IT IS PROVED from what has been said, because it has a special honesty in taming the passions, especially daring and fear. Although by the Fathers cited it is extended to the taming of nearly all vehement passions, as St. Thom. also teaches art. 2. ad 2.

I ASSERT thirdly, that Fortitude is a Cardinal virtue. So St. Bonav. in the places cited, St. Thom. quaest. 127. art. 11. IT IS PROVED by the Holy Doctor ex S. Sap. where it is numbered with the Cardinal Virtues in those words: She teacheth Sobriety, and Prudence, and Justice, and Virtue. The Holy Doctor proves the same in the places cited, from the Fathers alleged.

IT IS CONFIRMED because the Cardinal virtues are so called either because through them we enter into the other virtues; or because the order of human life is directed and regulated in the four Cardinals of the lesser world, in likeness of the greater, as the Holy Doctor says serm. 6. Hexaëmer. Such is fortitude: Therefore.

IT IS PROVED also by the reasoning of St. Bonaventure in 3. dist 33. passim, especially quaest. 4. because it belongs to the Cardinal virtues, or, as he says at the end, principal virtues, that which is chiefly attended to in virtue; but among the others one is placed to work firmly, as is clear from Aristotle 2. Eth. cap. 4. and Fortitude claims to itself the praise of working firmly.

From what has been said you have that the object of fortitude is the passions of Daring and Fear, moderating by the mean. So St. Thom. quaest. 123. art. 3. and St. Bonaventure in the places cited, and serm. 5. Hexaemer. from Aristotle lib. 2. Eth. cap. 7. and lib. 3. cap. 6. but it is mediately concerned with perils, especially of death, as the objects of those passions. Aristotle indeed says 3. Eth. cap. 3. and 9. that fortitude is chiefly about the perils of death, which is in war.

St. Thom. art. 6. ADDS, with Aristotle 3. Eth. cap. 9. that fortitude is more concerned with repressing fears than with moderating daring; therefore the principal act of fortitude is to endure, that is, to stand immovable in perils, rather than to attack. The reason is, because it is more difficult to repress fears in perils than to moderate daring. First, because he who endures suffers from another, as from a stronger; but the daring man attacks, as against a weaker; and it is more difficult to fight with a stronger than with a weaker. Second, he who endures already feels the perils imminent; but he who attacks has them as future. Third, to endure is lasting; but to attack can be sudden: and it is more difficult to remain immovable for a long time than to move suddenly.

OBSERVE, that the end, as it were proximate, of fortitude is to express the likeness of its habit in act; but its remote and ultimate end is beatitude, that is, God. So St. Thomas art. 7.

OBSERVE secondly, that the brave man, from the consideration of the honesty of his act, does indeed take delight, yet from the suffering of hardships, in which he is engaged, he grieves. So St. Thom. art. 8. ex Aristotele 3. Eth. cap. 9. The Holy Doctor adds above, that from the abundance of God's grace the pain and sadness are often swallowed up, as happened to the tender holy Virgins.

OBSERVE thirdly, that fortitude is seen chiefly in sudden events. So St. Thom. art. 9. ex Aristotele 3. Eth. cap. 8.

OBSERVE fourthly, that the brave man employs anger, but moderated by reason, for the act of fortitude. So St. Thom. quaest. 127. art. 10. ex Aristotele 3. Eth. cap. 8. and St. Bonavent. in 3. loco citato.

I ASSERT fourthly, that fortitude is inferior to Prudence and Justice, but superior to Temperance.

IT IS PROVED by the Holy Doctor 3. dist. 33. quaest. 4. for the Cardinal Virtues order man in those things that are toward the end, which are all something created; but since man is compared both to himself and to another, the Cardinal Virtues are the moderators of these: if in respect of himself, it can be about the rational, and behold Prudence; or about the Concupiscible, and behold Temperance; or about the Irascible, and behold Fortitude. But if it order toward another, thus it is Justice, because there is one ratio by which he is compared to another, which is the ratio of the due; and because this ratio can be attended to according to the act of each power, hence Cardinal Justice is said to go round about all the powers, and yet is one, on account of the one ratio of ordering toward another. From this you have that Justice is the most noble, then Prudence, which moderates reason, inferior to the will. Thirdly Fortitude, which moderates the concupiscible, even the sensible, inferior to reason and will: lastly Temperance, which is concerned with the concupiscible, which is the lowest.

NOTE, that St. Ambrose, cited by St. Bonaventure in Pharetra, prefers Fortitude to the others, but understand it secundum quid, namely, either in respect of a certain general utility, since it is useful both in warlike and in civil affairs, as St. Thom. answers art. 12. ad 1. Or because fortitude is concerned chiefly with difficulties.

Quaestio II: On the GIFT OF FORTITUDE

THE GIFT of fortitude is a habit existing, as in a subject, in the will, insofar as it is engaged about arduous things, and it easily makes it mobile for repelling fears and repressing daring, with the hope of escaping any perils whatsoever, which the virtue does not furnish. Hence the soul is better disposed by the gift of fortitude toward every arduous thing than by any moral virtue. Therefore through this fortitude the Saints wrought marvelous works of fortitude, enduring with exultation, Act. 5. They went rejoicing from the sight of the Council, because they were accounted worthy to suffer reproach for the name of Jesus. Thus Blessed Andrew hastened joyfully to the Cross, Agatha to prison. This gift, in the apex of perfection, which the Holy Doctor calls of the purified soul, renders the soul, as it were, insensible amid perils and other evils, and feasting and exulting amid delights. See the Holy Doctor de septem Donis, de Dono fortitudinis, cap. 2. et 3. bringing forth splendid things.

Quaestio III: On Martyrdom

CHIEF among the acts of Fortitude is to undergo death for God, which is to endure Martyrdom. Moreover, a Martyr is so called, as it were a confessor.

BASILIDES the heretic, cited by Tertullian in de praescript. toward the end, said that it is not licit to undergo Martyrdom. Gyraldus, however, counseled flight from Martyrdom, as though it were the work only of outstanding saints. St. Bonavent. refutes him in the Apologia pauperum.

I ASSERT that Martyrdom is in every case an act of virtue.

IT IS PROVED by the Holy Doctor from the epist. ad Heb. where, after narrating the deeds of the Martyrs, who for faith and religion experienced mockeries and scourges, chains and prisons, etc., he straightway exhorts in cap. 12. Let us run by patience to the fight proposed to us, looking on the Author of faith, and the finisher JESUS, who, having joy set before him, endured the cross, despising the shame. Where the Gloss: Girded and equipped, let us run without hesitation to the combat of Martyrdom.

NEXT he brings forward 2. Corinth. 12. Most gladly will I spend, and be spent myself, for your souls. Where the Gloss: Perfect Charity is that one be ready even to die for his brethren, and straightway Philippines 1. I desire to be dissolved, and to be with Christ: where the Gloss has: Certain imperfect men, who die with patience.

He also urges that passage 2. Timoth. 4. where Paul, exulting, is near Martyrdom: For I am even now ready to be sacrificed, and the time of my dissolution is at hand. I have fought the good fight, etc. and he cites the Gloss confirming the same.

He urges the same also from Act. 5. where the disciples went rejoicing from the sight of the Council, because they were accounted worthy to suffer reproach for the name of Jesus, as I also related above.

He ADDS that of 1 Peter, cap. 2. Christ suffered for us, leaving you an example, that you should follow his steps.

That it is a HEROIC act to lay down one's life for Christ, is had in Ioan. 5. But to decline death for a time, either to reserve oneself for a more glorious triumph, or for the solace and help of the flock, is not less praiseworthy; for thus the holy Pontiffs often hid themselves. Thus Christ also fled at one time.

He PROVES next by the examples of the Saints, Peter and Paul, Andrew, Laurence, Sebastian, Tiburtius, Vincentius, and the like, who offered themselves spontaneously to Martyrdom; for if that were not licit, they would already have gravely sinned and been damned, dying in a forbidden act, which is an insane thing to say; surely Christ exhorted, Matth. 10. Fear not them who kill the body, and cannot kill the soul.

THE REASONING of St. Bonaventure from the said Scriptures appears firm, for Martyrdom is a firm standing in faith and justice against the persecutors of the Church, and the offering of one's life to God, which is the greatest sign of Charity, as is said Ioan. 15.

I ASSERT secondly, that Martyrdom is an act of Fortitude. So St. Thom. art. 2. and in common with St. Bonavent. de septem donis, de Dono fortitudinis.

IT IS PROVED by the Holy Doctor first from that passage Heb. 11. The Saints by faith conquered kingdoms, were made strong in battle, turned armies to flight, etc. which the Church reads of the holy Martyrs, and St. Gregory homil. 27. in Evang. He expounds it thus: The saints were made strong, they tame the tormentors, they strengthen the spirit, they shine with virtues, they despise earthly things, they desire heavenly things, they can be killed, they cannot be bent, and homil. 30. in Evang. The Apostles would not have presumed to withstand the powers of this world, unless the fortitude of the Holy Spirit had made them firm. Thus Peter answered the Princes threatening him: We ought to obey God rather than men.

IT IS PROVED secondly by St. Bonaventure, by the reasoning drawn thence: The work of fortitude is to make firm in rectitude against perils, especially of death. But in such a way the Martyrs are made firm, as St. Cyprian has it lib. 2. epist. 6. ad Martyres.

I ASSERT thirdly, that Martyrdom is commanded also by Charity.

IT IS PROVED by the Holy Doctor, from the Scriptures cited.

I ADD therefore, that it is an act of the highest perfection, insofar as it is commanded by Charity. It is proved by the Holy Doctor from that passage Ioan. 15. Greater Charity than this no one hath, that a man lay down his life for his friends: but Charity is the greatest virtue, and hence its acts are most perfect, as is said 1 Corinth. 13. Coloss. 3.

I ASSERT fourthly, that a Christian is not bound to go to Tyrants for Martyrdom in every event, nor indeed ought he to offer an occasion for killing without cause; nevertheless in certain causes he not only can but even ought, as if the ignominy of the faith of Christ is at stake, if any are wavering in the faith. Thus the bravest Captain of the Church, St. Sebastian, protested this of himself. So St. Thom. art. 1. ad . and St. Bonaventure pursues this more fully in the place cited, Apolog. Christ counsels, Matth. 10. When they shall persecute you in this city, flee into another, yet this is not to be done absolutely, but the Gloss, with Rabanus, warns it is to be done in some case: indeed even perfect men fled at times on account of causes, either to provide for the flock; or to reserve themselves for a greater occasion, as Athanasius; but other perfect men ran to Martyrdom, whom I recalled above.

WHENCE the Holy Doctor infers that the adversary argues badly. Perfect men sometimes fled Martyrdom: Therefore it is not a work of perfection. For it is answered by denying the consequence. First, because not all perfect men fled, as I said: Next, because not everything perfect men do is of greater perfection; Jacob, David, Urias, Mathathias fled, yet they were not perfect in all things, for they cultivated neither virginity nor the Evangelical poverty; Athanasius also fled, who nevertheless encountered perils when there was need, but he fled at times from licit causes, not always.

NOR is it an objection, that passage Ioan. 21. Another shall gird thee, and lead thee whither thou wouldst not; for this signifies only that death is not to be inflicted on himself by the Martyr, as St. Bonaventure notes with St. Augustine; but by another, when it is shunned by the senses, although the will commands, for the honor of God, not to shun it, because the perfection of Charity commands also to overcome the fear of death, as the Holy Doctor notes from St. Augustine tract. 123. in Ioan. See the Holy Doctor distinguishing most splendidly.

I ASSERT fifthly, that for the perfect notion of Martyrdom it is required that one endure death for Christ, that is, for God. So St. Thom. quaest. 124. art. 4. St. Bonav. in the places cited, and in 4. dist. 4 part. 2. q. 2. et 3.

IT IS PROVED, because a Martyr is called, as it were, a witness of the Christian faith, by which the visible things are proposed to us as to be despised for the invisible, according to the Apostle Heb. 11. Therefore it belongs to Martyrdom that a man bear witness to the faith, professing that he despises all present things so as to attain the future, which does not happen except by the outpouring of his very life for God. Hence St. Augustine Serm. 4. de Innoc. and Serm. 1. de Sanctis, cited by St. Bonavent. Serm. 2. de B. Bartholomaeo and in 4. d. 4. part. 2. dubio 1. It is not the punishment that makes the Martyr, but the cause. The same he has in the Pharetra, lib. 4. cap. 49. citing St. Gregory in registr. lib. 2. ind. 11. cap. 36. with St. Cyprian.

YET it is not necessary that a Martyr die for the confession of the faith, but it suffices if he suffer for the defense of some virtue, and endure persecutions for justice, as St. Thom. says art. 5. we have an example in John the Baptist, who was killed not for the confession of the faith, but for preaching continence against the adulteress, as Valentia notes quaest. 2. puncto 1. Tanner. d. 4. quaest. 2. dub. 2. num. 34.

The Holy Doctor OBSERVES, however, in 4. d. 4. part. 2. dub. 1. that since for Martyrdom there is required a just will and a just cause, and the first failed in the Innocents, the second in the Thief, neither was a Martyrdom; nevertheless they obtained the laurel of Martyrdom by privilege from the grace of God, so that the effusion of blood for Christ was for them as though voluntarily endured, as Tanner. also warns num. 22. with St. Augustine Serm. 66. inter additos a Lovaniensibus, and others.

IN WHAT WAY Martyrdom is the Baptism of blood, we shall see in 3. part. Tract. de Baptismo, disp. 2. quaest. 1. with St. Bonavent. in 4. d. 4. part. 2. But whether a Martyr with a defect, as Blessed Martin, receives the laurel, I said elsewhere prima 2.

It is ANSWERED with St. Bonaventure in 2. dist. 40. art. 2. quaest. 1. that he has not the golden crown [Aureola], but only the golden one of charity.

I shall say only this with St. Bonaventure there quaest. 3. ad 4. that Martyrdom is called the Baptism of blood because in Martyrdom life is laid down, which is in the blood, as is said Levit. cit. Or because there, in the effusion of blood, every Martyrdom is ordinarily completed. He there observes that the holy Martyrs rescued by others from torments, except the sword. He assigns the reason, because the other torments act almost as it were, creatures working naturally, and because the creatures obey God, it was fitting that they show reverence even to the holy servants of God. Thus Lions and other beasts licked the feet of the Saints. The fire gave way, etc. But in the punishment of the sword free malice operates more, and it does not befit God to allow his work to act freely, although at times it was impeded in some respects, as the sword became torpid, as in St. Pantaleon.

YET the sword is not necessary for Martyrdom; nor fire, but hardships suffice, as St. Bonaventure notes Serm. 3. de S. Andrea. For thus SS. Sylverius, John, and others died, for whom nevertheless therefore the last responsory is changed in the office, and it says: Corona aurea, etc. But not: Hic est vere Martyr, not because they are not Martyrs, but because they did not shed blood. Truly, those who in prisons were consumed by hunger, and who by wasting disease in caverns for Christ, are Martyrs.

The Holy Doctor also TEACHES in 4. dist. 32. quaest. 1. ad secundum, that a wife cannot deny her husband that he proceed to Martyrdom, if it is necessary.

St. Bonaventure relates from the Fathers MANY analogical Martyrdoms in bearing adversities, in the mortification of the flesh, and in the pursuit of virtues, in Pharetra, lib. 4. cap. 49. for sermons. The same he indicates in Psal. 118. in those words Narraverunt mihi iniqui fabulationes.

The Holy Doctor OBSERVES also ad 15. Ioan. ad those words: Quae ego mando, etc. That Martyrdom cannot be nobly sustained without the supreme help of God; for to pour out life, which we love naturally, is not of nature.

IF you say, that the heretical Donatists underwent death for the faith, by forcing tyrants to arms.

The Holy Doctor ANSWERS, that this is to die from despair, and headlong error; but a Martyr dies for the supreme end.

FINALLY he observes in 4. dist. cit. and in serm. primo de S. Matthia, that a Martyr is so purified by Martyrdom that he straightway flies to heaven, and therefore he does him an injury who prays for him, as St. Augustine teaches de verbis Apostoli, Serm. 17. and it is related extra. de celebr. Missarum, cap. Cum Matthae, §. ultimo.

The HOLY DOCTOR ad cap. 3. sap. in those words: Iustorum animae in manu Dei sunt, which the Church sings of the Martyrs, asks why the Martyrs, among the other Saints, are especially called just.

He ANSWERS, because he is just who disregards loss for the sake of a friend, as is said Prov. 12. But the Martyrs disregard and despise the loss of all things and of life for the love of God, as the Apostle describes, Heb. 11.

IN Psal. 115. he expounds the etymology of the name Martyr in Greek Μάρτυρ TESTIS, and says; that a Martyr bears witness to Christ, while he does not hesitate to undergo death for him, and to pour out his life: Secondly to bear witness to the resurrection of the flesh; for he would not give his flesh to death unless he had hoped to receive it again: Thirdly to bear witness to the truth of eternal beatitude; for he would not so despise worldly things unless he expected eternal things.

IN Psal. 118. in those words: Many, who persecute me, etc. he notes that on the feasts of the most holy Nativity honor is shown to Martyrs of threefold kind. For first there is Stephen, who was a Martyr in will and in deed. Next John, who in will alone; thirdly the Innocents, who had only the deed.

FINALLY on Psal. 33. he concludes that Martyrdom ought to have three things, namely, the Final Cause, that it be suffered for God: The Formal Cause, that it be sustained willingly, nor be as the wheel of a cart, which carries straw, and yet creaks and murmurs: Thirdly perseverance.

Dubitatio I: Whether MARTYRDOM confers first grace

Whether MARTYRDOM confers first grace.

THE FIRST opinion is that Martyrdom, by privilege and the special promise of Christ, has the power of conferring first grace, and consequently, like a Sacrament, justifies ex opere operato. So Sotus in 4. dist. 4 quaest. 6. et dist. 14. quaest. 13. litt. V. §. sed nec debet requiri, whom the disciples follow, Faber disp. 11. de poenit. cap. 1. Mastrius 4. disp. 2. quaest. 7. art. 2., adducing Vega, Bellarmine, Suarez, Henriquez, Valentia, Tolerus, Coninck, Lessius, Amicus, Aversa, Bonacina, Becanus, Baldus, Turrianus, etc.

Of these, some do not speak so absolutely, as Tannerus disp. 4. quaest. 3. dubio 3. numero 114.

THE SECOND opinion holds that Martyrdom does not confer first grace ex opere operato, and does not help without it. Wherefore it judges contrition necessary for one existing in mortal sin. So D. Bonaventure 4. d. 4. part. 2. quaest. 2. Alexander of Hales 4 part. quaest. 8. m. 9. art. 4. D. Thomas 3. part. quaest. 66. art. 12. ad 2. Paludanus d. 4. quaest. 3. art. 1. and others of old. Vasquez defends this opinion as common among the ancients, and even among the Fathers, d. 153. cap. 3, and Cano relec. de paenit. part. 3, and Bassaeus V. Martyr. num. 7, adducing also Ban. 2. 2. quaest. 124. art. 5. d. 1. Less. lib. 3. cap. 1. d. 4. num. 43. Sylvius 3. part. quaest. 66. art. 11. quaestio 3.

I ASSERT with this opinion that Martyrdom has not the power of conferring first grace ex opere operato.

It is PROVED first by the argument of D. Bonaventure, quaest. cit.: For the removal of a mortal fault ex opere operato, Sacraments are necessary in reality or in vow, as the Council of Trent teaches, sess. 7. can. 4. and sess. 6. cap. 4, and this because justification of this kind depends on the institution of Christ. Now Christ instituted Baptism as simply necessary in reality or in vow. But baptism of blood precisely is not Baptism either in reality or in vow, and the notion of vow extends, at most, to baptism of the Spirit (flame).

The adversaries RESPOND that there is a promise even about Martyrdom, Matth. 10. Whoever shall confess me before men, I will also confess him before my Father. Ioan. 12. Whoever loses his soul for my sake, shall find it. Mark 8. Whoever shall lose his soul for my sake and for the Gospel, shall save it. These words, according to Augustine 13. de civit. cap. 7, contain a special promise made to those who expose their life for Christ. But if Baptism, because it is a figurative representation of the death of Christ, as in Rom. 6, has that power; much more Martyrdom, since it is a real conformation to Christ dying. This argument was used by Clement lib. 5. Constit. Apost. cap. 7. Cyprian Ep. 37. Tertullian in Apolog. near the end, and other Fathers.

But truly all these things collapse by the reasoning of D. Bonaventure, loc. cit. For Christ promises remission precisely to Baptism of water alone, at least in vow with an act of penance, as the Seraphic Doctor shows, dist. 4. part. 2. quaest. 1. ad 1, and the Council of Trent cited above. And although Scripture, with the Fathers, shows in Martyrdom a certain accidental excellence toward a little crown of laurel, still no one will find therein any excellence without charity, as I shall say in the response to the arguments.

And if you say it is extended to little children, I say they are not formally averse to the acts proper to it by God. And behold the great difference, which neither Mastrius num. 182. nor Amicus diss. 12. sect. 3. acknowledged. Nor indeed does Christ promise glory through Martyrdom to those existing in mortal sin, but simply to those laying down their soul, as S. Bonaventure notes on Ioan. 12.

It is PROVED secondly by D. Bonaventure in 1. sent. dist. 17. part. 1. dub. 7. from 1 Cor. 13, where the Apostle, enumerating heroic works, all without charity, finally recounts Martyrdom: And if I deliver my body, so that I burn, but have not charity, it profits me nothing. And immediately he takes against himself that dying for another is an act of heroic charity, according to Ioan. 13. Greater charity no one has, than that a man lay down his soul for his friends.

Mastrius RESPONDS first that charity is required consequently, just as it is required for faith.

AGAINST this: because he requires it so that the work may be meritorious; therefore it ought already to be clothed in charity.

He RESPONDS secondly that this can be understood even of other works outside Martyrdom, as if someone torment himself for empty glory, or do other works.

AGAINST this: because the Apostle in the literal sense ascends by gradation to the heroic work of Martyrdom. So D. Bernard expounds it, serm. 27. in Cant., cited in D. Bonaventure lib. 2. Pharetra, cap. 25. The same D. Bernard, epist. 77, signifies that Martyrdom does not supply the place of Baptism except by the merit of the one receiving it.

But the Seraphic Doctor OBSERVES in the cited dub. 7 that through Martyrdom sins are remitted, that is, one is disposed to grace. Therefore he concludes: I believe nevertheless, that if someone who has no great obstacle should endure death for Christ, he would dispose himself to the reception of grace, so that charity would be given him.

In this sense, lib. 4. Pharetrae, cap. 49, he cites D. Augustine lib. 20. de civit. cap. 13. and Prosper in l. sent. 149. sententia: Those who, without receiving the laver of regeneration, die for the confession of Christ, it avails them as much for washing away sins as if they were washed in the sacred font of Baptism.

He OBSERVES also in the cited dub. with D. Augustine 13. de Civitate, cap. 7, that Martyrdom is an act of heroic love, according to Ioan. 13. Greater charity no one has, and therefore no one undertakes the work of Martyrdom who has not been anticipated by a great aid of charity, and consequently is not disposed to charity if he undertakes it sincerely; for S. Augustine says: When, without abundance of grace and Spirit, man could love Christ so much that he could not deny him in so great a peril of life with so great a hope of pardon.

Again, in the cited quaest. the Seraphic Doctor brings forward a congruence, on account of which the Martyr suffering from the abundance of actual grace is disposed more to perfect habitual charity than one receiving Baptism, namely, because the latter is figuratively made like to Christ dead for us; the former truly, that is, really.

D. Thomas brings this reasoning forward, quaest. 66. art. 11. and quaest. 87. art. 1. ad 2, and other Scholastics with D. Bonaventure, and it is taken from D. Clement P. lib. 1. Constit. Apostolic. cap. 7, where he says: He who has merited to obtain Martyrdom, let him rejoice in the Lord, that he has attained so great a crown, and although he may have been a Catechumen, let him depart glad; for the passion he sustains for Christ shall stand to him for a truer baptism, because he himself in very fact dies with Christ; the others in figure.

The Seraphic Doctor has ANOTHER proposition in the cited quaest., taken from D. Augustine, or Gennadius, de Eccl. dogmatib. cap. 74, where he says: All sins are forgiven in Baptism; but in Martyrdom they are extinguished. Ambrose also speaks in this way, lib. 1. de poenis. cap. 2, where he wishes to say that in Martyrdom sins are extinguished because they are washed away by justification, and by death the power of sinning is taken away. But this does not weaken our assertion.

SIMILARLY he says that Martyrdom is a Baptism and a crown, because he immediately transfers to it what is the utterance of S. Cyprian de singularitate cleric. cap. 20, which the Seraphic Doctor does not deny, but confirms in the body of the text.

OTHER things like these the Holy Fathers have who enumerate Martyrdom among the baptisms, as Nazianzen orat. 39. Ambrose Serm. 3. in Psal. 118. Tertullian lib. de laps. cap. 16.

They seem MORE to conflict, because, treating of Baptism of water, they except Martyrdom: Cyril of Jerusalem Cathec. 3. If anyone is not baptized, he has not salvation, except only the Martyrs: and Fulgentius, de fide ad Petrum, cap. 3. Without the Sacrament of Baptism, except those who in the Catholic Church pour out their blood for Christ without Baptism, no one can receive the kingdom of heaven, nor eternal life. Bernard makes the same exception, epist. 77. Yet these do not mean this of one who is in actual mortal sin, but of one existing in original sin and having a vow of it; for if he is in mortal sin, they require an act of contrition.

The adversaries bring forward MANY other passages from Innocent III in cap. Cum Martha, Augustine Serm. 5. de Martyribus, and Serm. 27. de verbis Apostoli, Tract. 84. in Ioan., Tertullian in Apol. at the end, and in Scorpiaco, cap. 6, Cyprian lib. de laudibus Mart., Clem. Alex. lib. IV. strom., Cypr. epist. 52, saying that all sins are remitted to the Martyr, and that he flies to heaven at once. All these are understood of venial sins, as the Seraphic Doctor notes in the body of the text.

They will also OPPOSE that word of John: Greater love than this no one has, than that a man lay down his soul for his friends.

The Seraphic Doctor RESPONDS dubio cit. that the sense of this text is there expounded, when it is said: for enemies.

Wherefore, as Vasquez urges excellently, this efficacy of Martyrdom depends on the Divine will; but neither from Scripture, nor from the definition of the Church, nor from any other revelation is this power had, but when a Martyr is spoken of, it is supposed that he was justified from supernatural love by contrition, if he were stained lethally; and by a vow of Baptism, if he is not yet baptized. For these are the necessary means from the clear definitions of the Church: for an adult is bound to have a vow of Baptism if he cannot be rebaptized, as the Council of Trent defines in the place cited above; and if he does not have it, he is not a Martyr, since he is not disposed; for he lacks the will of assuming the necessary means of salvation. Similarly perfect penance with a vow of the Sacrament of Penance for mortal sins is a necessary means, as the same Council of Trent defines sess. 14. cap. 4. Therefore one not contrite, voluntarily undergoing death in that way, will perish, as many even of the adversaries concede; for he is not by Martyrdom exempted from the observance of the law, as Scotus infers d. 4. quaest. 1. litt. V., inferring that, if he does not remember, Martyrdom does not supply it, which doctrine Mastrius follows disp. 2. quaest. 7. num. 188.

For I ARGUE ad hominem from the same Mastrius disp. 1. quaest. 10. num. 560. et in 3. disp. 6. quaest. 15.: What is necessary by a necessity of means for salvation is so necessary that without it salvation cannot be obtained, nor does ignorance or forgetfulness excuse; but Baptism for all, and Penance for adult sinners, is necessary by a necessity of means, as he himself asserts immediately after num. 365., with Scotus in several places; therefore.

The adversaries RESPOND that Martyrdom has a privilege, so that it suffices for original sin, and for mortal sins with attrition alone.

Yet this privilege is found nowhere, John 3 bearing against it: Unless one be born again of water and the Holy Spirit, etc. Nor that word: Unless you do penance, etc. Which the Council of Trent expounds of the pain of contrition sess. 14. cap. 4., where it defines that with sorrow outside the Sacrament it is necessary, which has always been necessary for salvation; but this is contrition, as the Council declares, and Mastrius cites it num. 198.

HENCE now the question is solved, what disposition is required in a Martyr existing in actual mortal sin.

For SOME have said attrition suffices; for this is necessary even in Baptism of water; however some add that, from inadvertence, when death has overtaken, the will of dying for Christ suffices. So Scotus 4. dist. 14. quaest. 1. Faber disp. 11. de Poenit. cap. 2. Aretinus 4. dist. 14. quaest 3. art. 4. Hiquaeus in the same place, and other Scotists, to whom Mastrius subscribes disp. 2. quaest. 7. num. 195., adducing also Suarez, Coninck, Amicus, Aversa, Bonacina, Becanus, Turrianus, and others among these. Caspensis thinks the same Tract. 17. disp. 4. sect. 3. num. 30. with Sanchez Tom. 1. Decal. lib. 2. cap. 35., because, he says, the love of God above all things is implicitly enclosed in this. So Suar. disp. 29. sect. 3. Henriquez cap. 34. Coninch. quaest. 6. dub. 2. Bonac. de Sacram. disp. 2. quaest. 1. puncto 1.

THE SECOND opinion requires contrition: So the Authors cited at the beginning of the question for the first opinion. And it is D. Thom. quaest. 66. art. 12. ad 2., where for this he expounds the passage of the Apostle, 1 Cor. 13: If I deliver my body, so that I burn, but have not charity, it profits me nothing. Whence he infers that Baptism of blood includes Baptism of the Spirit.

I assert therefore, secondly, that contrition is necessary.

It is PROVED most efficaciously by the reason brought forward above, because Penance from contrition with the Sacrament in vow, when it cannot be had, is necessary by a necessity of means; and just as, if the Martyr were to survive, he would be bound to Baptism of water, if he is not baptized, and to confession, if he has actually died in sin, so it is required that he now be contrite. And this, speaking per se, Suarez asserts to be necessary, because contrition with a vow of the Sacrament (he says) is by the Decree of the Council of Trent sess. 14. cap. 4. necessary where the Sacrament cannot be had.

NEITHER does he rightly infer in the second dicto that attrition could suffice from ignorance.

But I ARGUE against him ad hominem: A necessity of means differs from a necessity of precept, because the latter does not admit ignorance, as all confess; but according to you, perfect Penance here is necessary by a necessity of means; therefore. Wherefore Mastrius does not rightly say that we seek a principle by this argument; for we argue from the universal foundation of the Church. Wherefore at least in death we ought to embrace the safer opinion, and not to fight in uncertainty, as Bassaeus says solidly with D. Bonaventure.

Dubitatio II: Whether the Baptism of infants can be supplied by martyrdom

The NEGATIVE opinion is attributed to Alexander of Hales 4. part. quaest. 22. memb. 5. art. 1. Adrian in 4. quaest. ult. de Baptismo, Armachanus lib. 8. de qq. Armen. cap. 37. D. Bonaventure in 4. dist. 4. part. 2. art. 1. quaest. 2. — where however he did not teach it, nor can this opinion be found in his writings, as Suarez disp. 29. sect. 1. Vasquez disp. 153. cap. 7. Mastrius disp. 2. quaest. 7. art. 4. and other recent authors cited by him testify.

The SECOND opinion, the assertive one, is that of D. Thomas 2. 2. quaest. 114. art. 1. ad 1. et quodl. 6. art. 4. Richard in 4. dist. 4. art. 2. quaest. 3. Scotus dist. 4. quaest. 3., whom the others commonly imitate, as in Mastrius loc. cit. Soto disp. 3. art. 11. Suarez, and Vasquez above. This is the opinion of D. Bonaventure dist. 4. part. 2. art. 1. quaest. 2., where he limits the opinion of Alexander of Hales, who said that Baptism of water profits more persons than that of blood. Whence he makes no distinction here between infants and adults, as Suarez notes.

MORE CLEARLY, in the fourth part of that distinction, dub. 4. cit., where he confesses that the Holy Innocents are Martyrs by privilege. And in dubio 4. he asserts that an infant who, while being carried to Baptism, is killed so as not to be baptized, and dies for Baptism, is rightly and piously believed baptized in his blood: what could be clearer?

THE Innocents indeed the Church venerates as Martyrs, and the Holy Fathers confess it: Augustine lib. 3. de lib. arb. cap. 23. et lib. 2. de Symbolo ad Catech. cap. 5. et lib. 3. cap. 4. Cyprian serm. de Stella, et Magis. Leo Pope serm. de Epiph. primo, et secundo. Origen homil. 3. in varia Evang. loca. And the Church prays for them in its prayer as Martyrs.

S. Bonaventure adds, dub. 1., that the liberty of will was wanting to them, and therefore their Martyrdom was not so perfect as in holy adults; for to perfection charity is required, moving the will, as is said Ioan. 15. Wherefore, when Mastrius infers: If contrition were necessary, it would follow that in infants the Martyrdom is imperfect, according to the Fathers — which is readily granted to him: Nay, I retort: If the reason is equal, therefore no disposition of will is required in adults.

Quaestio IV: On the precepts of Fortitude

On the precepts of Fortitude.

We do not have affirmative precepts of fortitude in particular; although we do have precepts of Patience and Perseverance, annexed to fortitude, as D. Thomas says quaest. 140. art. 2. ad 3. Tannerus disp. 3. quaest. 2. dub. 3.

Some have precepts in a certain genus, for instance in wars, of not yielding Deuter. 20. et Iosue 1. et prima Ioan. 3., of laying down one's life for the brethren. Nor is there any doubt that the acts of fortitude themselves fall under a precept, as I said in my Tract. de Charitate, when treating of the order of that virtue.

As to the negative precepts, inordinate fear, opposed to fortitude, is forbidden: Deut. 20. et Matth. 10. Fear not them who kill the body.

Quaestio V: On the Vices opposed to Fortitude

On the Vices opposed to Fortitude.

Three vices opposed to fortitude are enumerated: Timidity, Fearlessness (intimiditas), and Audacity.

As to Fear, it is then inordinate when the appetite absolutely flees those things which reason dictates are to be endured. So S. Thomas.

Here is condemned that fear which is inordinate concerning the dangers of death, when on this account one abandons the faith, or those things which fortitude commands to be pursued. Of these it is said Apocal. 21. But the fearful, etc. their part shall be in the pool, etc.

Fearlessness (intimiditas) is the vice by which things to be feared are not feared. Thus of the Celts Aristotle says 3. Eth. cap. 7. They fear nothing on account of foolishness, and there he opposes this to Fortitude.

But it exceeds and inclines to the extreme. Of these Prov. 14. The wise man feareth, and declineth from evil: the fool leapeth over, and confideth.

Audacity is an excess in undergoing and invading dangers, as D. Thomas says quaest. 127. art. 1., according to Aristotle 2. Ethic. capite 7. et lib. 3. cap. 7.

It differs from fearlessness; for this does not estimate the dangers, as if in respect of the one acting there were none, or they were not evils; but Audacity, or rashness, attacks dangers rashly on account of excessive overconfidence.

It is said to have the vice in the opposite extreme, namely, Cowardice (ignavia), as is gathered from Aristotle loc. cit., namely, when one does not dare what he ought, and when he ought.

Commonly, however, these sins are not judged distinct from the sins which follow from them, or to which they are ordered.

Disputatio II: On the Virtues joined to Fortitude

Quaestio I: On Magnanimity

Quaestio II: On the Vices opposed to MAGNANIMITY

Quaestio III: On MAGNIFICENCE

Quaestio IV: On the Vices opposed to MAGNIFICENCE

Quaestio V: On PATIENCE

Quaestio VI: On the Vices opposed to PATIENCE

Quaestio VII: On PERSEVERANCE

Quaestio VIII: On the Vices opposed to PERSEVERANCE

Tractatus VI: E TEMPERANTIA

Proemium I: Prooemium

Disputatio I: FIRST. ON THE VIRTUE OF TEMPERANCE

Quaestio I: Which Virtue Temperance is, and of what kind

Quaestio II: Which Vices are contrary to TEMPERANCE

Quaestio III: On the parts of TEMPERANCE

Quaestio IV: On Shamefastness

Quaestio V: On Honesty

Quaestio VI: On Abstinence

Dubitatio I: What FASTING is, and of how many kinds

Dubitatio II: In what way natural Fasting is broken

Dubitatio III: Whether Fasting of itself is a good work, and a precept

Dubitatio IV: From what one must abstain in the Ecclesiastical Fast

Dubitatio V: On the evening collation

Dubitatio VI: On the hour of refreshment on the Fast day

Dubitatio VII: Who are bound to fast

Quaestio VII: On SOBRIETY

Quaestio VIII: On CHASTITY

Quaestio IX: On Virginity

Dubitatio I: Whether Virginity is a Virtue

Dubitatio II: Whether Virginity excels conjugal Continence

Dubitatio III: Whether the reward of Virginity is the Aureole

Quaestio X: On CONTINENCE

Dubitatio I: On MILDNESS

Quaestio XI: On CLEMENCY

Quaestio XII: On MODESTY

Quaestio XIII: On HUMILITY

Disputatio II: On the Vices opposed to the Virtue of TEMPERANCE

Quaestio I: On GLUTTONY

Quaestio II: On Drunkenness

Quaestio III: On LUST

Dubitatio I: What LUST is, and of how many kinds

Dubitatio II: Whether in the genus of Lust there is parvity of matter

Dubitatio III: On FORNICATION

Dubitatio IV: On STUPRATION

Dubitatio V: On INCEST

Dubitatio VI: On ADULTERY

Dubitatio VII: On SACRILEGE

Dubitatio VIII: On sins against nature

Dubitatio IX: On the lust of spouses

Dubitatio X: On ABDUCTION

Quaestio IV: On INCONTINENCE

Quaestio V: On ANGER

Quaestio VI: On CRUELTY

Question VII

Dubitatio I: On the adornment of Women

Dubitatio II: On Immodesty in words, gestures, jokes, and games

Quaestio VIII: On P R I D E

Quaestio IX: LAST. On the other Vices opposed to the potential parts of Temperance

Tractatus VII: E VARIIS HOMINUM STATIBUS, ET OFFICIIS

Proemium I: Prooemium

Disputatio I: FIRST. ON STATES, AND PERFECTION IN GENERAL

Quaestio I: What a STATE is, and of how many kinds

Quaestio II: On the state of perfection

Dubitatio I: In what the Perfection of man consists

Dubitatio II: What Perfection can be had in this life

Dubitatio III: Who are in the state of Perfection

Quaestio III: Whether some who are not in the state of perfection perform, by reason of their office, works more perfect than some who are in the state of Perfection

Disputatio II: On the State of the Bishop

Quaestio I: Whether a BISHOP is in the state of perfection

Quaestio II: Of what kind he must be who is assumed to the Episcopate

Quaestio III: Whether it is lawful to seek, or refuse, an Episcopate

Quaestio IV: Whether Residence is necessary for Bishops, and by what law

Quaestio V: Whether the Church, and Bishops, have dominion over certain temporal things

Quaestio VI: Whether Bishops, and other Ecclesiastics, have dominion over revenues that are superfluous to their state

Quaestio VII: Whether those Bishops who were formerly Religious are bound to Regular observance

Disputatio III: On the State of Regular Prelacy

Quaestio I: Whether the state of Regular Prelacy in a Religion is necessary

Quaestio II: How the Prelate of a Religion is to be chosen

Quaestio III: How many Prelates there are in one religion, and what order among them

Quaestio IV: Whether it befits a Regular Prelate to remain long in the same office

Quaestio V: Whether a religious Prelate has the power of coercing subjects with penalties, both spiritual and corporal

Quaestio VI: What solemnities a Regular Prelate, acting in judgment, is bound to observe

Quaestio VII: Whether appeal can be made from a Prelate, or Regular Judge

Quaestio VIII: Who is the Judge from Whom, and to Whom appeal is made

Quaestio IX: Whether a Regular Prelate can dispense with his subject, Who, and in what

Quaestio X: What power a Regular Prelate has to absolve, both from sins, and from penalties

Quaestio XI: Whether a Regular Prelate has the Power of administering temporal things, and what

Quaestio XII: Whether, and What, Regular Prelates can do concerning conferring Orders, and blessing things, or places

Disputatio IV: LAST. On the State of the Active, and Contemplative life

Quaestio I: Whether the Division of life into Active, and Contemplative is sufficient

Quaestio II: Which state is more excellent than the other: the state of the Active life, or conversely, the Contemplative

Quaestio III: Whether there is a Mixed Life resulting from the Active, and Contemplative, and which of these is more excellent

Quaestio IV: What are the chief exercises of the Active life

Quaestio V: On the chief Act of the Contemplative life, and how this act differs from Cogitation, Meditation, Speculation, and Intuitive vision

Quaestio VI: Whether Contemplation has certain degrees of its perfection, how many, and which

↑ Top of work