Selected quad for the lemma: work_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
work_n	charity_n	faith_n	justification_n	4,801	5	9.5998	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A02568	The peace of Rome Proclaimed to all the world, by her famous Cardinall Bellarmine, and the no lesse famous casuist Nauarre. Whereof the one acknowledgeth, and numbers vp aboue three hundred differences of opinion, maintained in the popish church. The other confesses neere threescore differences amongst their owne doctors in one onely point of their religion. Gathered faithfully out of their writings in their own words, and diuided into foure bookes, and those into seuerall decads. Whereto is prefixed a serious disswasiue from poperie. By I.H.	Azpilcueta, Martín de, 1492?-1586.; Hall, Joseph, 1574-1656.; Bellarmino, Roberto Francesco Romolo, Saint, 1542-1621. Disputationes de controversiis Christianae fidei. English. Selections.	1609 (1609)	STC 12696; ESTC S106027	106,338	252

done in a set forme of words c. For penance is the act of the penitent not of the Priest and absolution is an act of the Priest not of the penitent Bellarm. ibid. c. 15. p. 96. Seuenthly Gropperus reiected by Bellarmine THere is no Catholike writer which makes the matter of this Sacrament to be onely the action of the Priest pronouncing absolution in a set forme saue onely Gropperus or whosoeuer was the Author of the Enchiridion Coloniense which sometimes seemes to speake very vnheedely For Diuines would eyther haue it consist in absolution alone or else they assigne the matter to be on the behalfe of the penitent the forme from the Priest which indeede is the commonest opinion of almost all Bellarmine 1. b. of pen. cap. 16. p. 98. Eightly Scotists against Thomas Bonauenture and others Vega Ferrariensis c. THe Scotists obiect that absolution alone is the cause of grace for that al the power of the Sacrament rests in the keyes which are the Priests not the penitents I answer first by denying the consequent the sacrament may consist of two parts yet worke only by one as a man consists of body soule yet vnderstands onely by his soule and this answere is followed by them who place the vertue of the Sacrament in absolution alone which was once the opinion of St. Thomas and Saint Bonauenture and other ancients vpon 4. dist Sent. dist 18. and of the later Andreas Vega Francis of Ferrara c. Farther it may be answered that absolution is indeede the principall cause of iustification not the onely cause but that is partly in the keyes of the Absoluer partly in the act of the penitent So holds Saint Thomas who recanted his former opinion 3 part q. 86. art 6. Bellarmine ibid. c. 16. p. 103. Ninthly Durandus against Thomas and the common opinion OF the diuision of Penance into contrition confession satisfaction there are two questions One amongst the Catholikes the other with the Heretickes The former is not whether these three be necessary and absolutely to be vsed but whether all be the true parts of the Sacrament For it was the opinion of Durandus vpon 4. dist 16. q. 1. that onely confession is the materiall part of this Sacrament of penance and that contrition is the disposition towards it and satisfaction the fruit of it But the common opinion of Diuines and of Saint Thomas 3. p. q. 90. is that all three of them are the true materiall parts of the Sacrament of Penance neither can now be doubted of since it is flatly set downe by two generall Councels of Florence and Trent Bellarm. ibid. c. 17. p. 104. Tenthly Adrianus refuted by Bellarmine THat there may be a conditional will at the least of things impossible as well as a desire of a thing lost see defended against Adrianus q. 1. de paenitentia by Bellarm. l. 2. of penance cap. 5. pag. 155. DECAD VII First Io. Maior Iac. Almain Andr. Vega against Thomas Scotus Durand Albert. Soto Canus c. BVT in this our Catholike writers doe not agree whether the purpose of a better life and detestation of sinne be expresly and formally necessary to true contrition or whether it be sufficient to haue it implicitely or confusedly and virtually The old Diuines as Peter Lombard Alexander Alensis S. Thomas Scotus Durandus Albertus and others simply teach that it is of the very essence of contrition to detest our sinne and to purpose amendement and though they distinguish not betwixt a formal and vertuall purpose yet they plainely shew they meane a direct formall purpose which was after more plainely taught by Pope Adrian 6. in 5. quodl art 3. Tho. Caietanus Dominicus a Soto Melchior Canus yet there haue beene some few that haue disputed against it and contenting themselues with a virtual purpose which is concluded in the hatred of their sins haue denied that other to be necessary In this ranke were Io. Maior Iac. Almayne in 4. Sent. d. 14. Andr. Vega vpon the Councell of Trent c. 21. Bellarm. ibid. c. 6. p. 157. Secondly Capreolus Dom. a Soto and others against Peter Lomb. Thomas Albertus Bonauenture c. IN this onely doe the Schoolemen seeme here to disagree That some wil haue the act of penance as also the act of faith and charity to be onely a disposition to the remission of sinnes and not to be any merit either of worke or congruity of the forgiuenesse of them Of this opinion is Io. Capreolus vpon 2. Sent d. 4. q. 1. Dominicus a Soto 2. b. of Nature and Grace c. 4. But other and the most hold those acts to be not onely a disposition towards but a merit by congruity of our iustification which opinion is the Masters of Sent. b. 2. d. 27. and St. Thomas vpon 2. d. 27. of Albertus S. Bonauenture Besides of Scotus Durandus Gabriel and others vpon 2. dist 28. And of the later Writers Andreas Vega 8 b. vpon the Councell of Trent Bellarm. ibid. c. 12. p. 185. Thirdly one Popish Doctor against the rest THe Catholike Doctors with common consent are wont to teach that contrition if it be perfect and haue the desire and vow of the Sacrament of Baptisme or Absolution reconciles a man to God and remits sinne before the Sacrament of Penance be performed But there was of late a Catholike Doctor who not many yeares since in a booke which he wrote of charity taught against this common opinion Bellarm. ib. c. 13. p. 191. Fourthly Armachanus confuted by Bellarmine RIchardus Armachanus in l. 9 quaest Armen cap. 27. taught it probable that for some great sinnes pardon could not be had though the sinner should doe whatsoeuer he could for obtaining it But this we affirm not as probable but as certain and confessed of Catholikes that no multitude or haynousnes of sinne can be such as may not be done away by true repentance Bellarm. ibid. c. 15. p. 209. Fiftly Bellarmine against Richardus THat the sinne against the holy Ghost is vnpardonable Richardus teacheth to be not in respect of the fault but of the punishment because if a man repent not of it none of his temporall punishment required to satisfaction shall be forgiuen Bellarm. ibid. c. 16. Confuted by Bellarmine by 3. arguments pag. 219. Sixtly Rupertus opposed by Bellarmine THat feare which is one of the foure passions of the minde is not in it selfe euill See defended against Rupertus the Abbat l. 9. de operibus spiritus by Bellarm. ibid. c. 17. p. 223. Seuenthly the Councell of Trent against Petr. Oxoniensis Erasmus Rhenamus THere was about some hundreth yeare since one Petrus Oxoniensis which affirmed that the particular and speciall confession of our sinnes in seuerall is not required by any law of God but onely by some Decree of the vniuersall Church In our age haue held the same errour Erasmus Roterodamus and Beatus Rhenanus who hold that

done by a man not regenerate by Baptisme c. The contrary opinion is receiued and allowed in the Schooles of Catholike Diuines See Pet. Lombard and the Diuines vpon 2. Sent. dist 24. Bellarm. l. 5. of iustification c. 12. p. 438. DECAD VI. First Guliel Altisidoriensis against all Popish Doctors IT was the singular opinion of Gulielm Altisidoriensis l. 3. Tract 12. c. 1. c. that merit doth more principally depend vpon faith then charity which opinion of his doth not a little fauour the heretickes of this time But in truth Scripture is so pregnant against him that I wonder so worthy a man could be so far deceiued Bellarm. ibid. c. 15. p. 454. Secondly Bellarm. against many of their graue Authors THough there be some graue Authors which hold that euery good worke of a iust man and a man indued with charity is meritorious of eternall life yet I hold it more probable that there is further required to merite that the good worke should in the very act of it proceede from charity and be directed to God as the supernatural end c. Bellarm. l. 5. cap. 15. pag 456. Thirdly Thomas Waldensis Paulus Burgensis against Durandus and Gregorius and the common opinion ALL Catholickes acknowledge that good workes are meritorious of eternall life but some holde that these wordes of congruity and condignity are not to bee vsed but onely that wee should say absolutely that good workes by the grace of GOD doe merite eternall life So teacheth Thomas Waldensis Tom. 3. of Sacraments chap. 7. Paulus Burgensis in Psalme 35. Others will haue them to merite by condignity in a large manner So teach Durandus and Gregorius The common opinion of Diuines dooth simply admit a merite of condignity Bellarmine lib. 5. cap. 16. pag. 459 Where note that Bellarmine findes Durandus to hold the same in this point with vs. pag. 460. lin 5. Fourthly Bellarmine against some of their acute Distinguishers HOw some distinguish nicely betwixt Dignum and Condignum and their confutation who will admit a merite of dignity not of condignity See Bellarm. l. 5. c. 16. p. 459. Fiftly Caietane and Dom. a Soto Scotus Andr Vega Tho. and Bonauenture with Bellarm differing SOme hold that the good workes of the iust merite eternall life vpon their very worth in regard of the worke though there were no such agreement betwixt God and vs So hold Caietane in 2.2 quaest 114. and Dominicus a Soto 3. booke of Nature and Grace chap. 7. Others contrarily thinke that good workes proceeding from grace are not meritorious vpon the very worth of the worke but onely in regard of Gods couenant with vs and his gratious acceptation Thus holdes Scotus in 1. Sent. d. 17. q. 2. whom other of the old Schoolemen follow and of the later Andreas Vega yet this opinion differs far from the heresie of the Lutherans c. But to me the meane opinion seemes more probable which teaches that good workes are meritorious of eternall life vpon condignity in respect of the worke and couenant together which opinion I doubt not is agreeable to the Councell of Trent and the chiefe Diuines as St. Thomas and Bonauent Bellarm. l. 5 c. 17. p. 464. Sixtly Thomas and Bonauent against Andr. Vega and the Doctor of Louan THe last question is whether God reward good works of his meere liberality aboue their worthines the common opinion constantly affirmes it as is plaine in Saint Thomas S. Bonauent Scotus Durandus c. But Andr. Vega and that Doctor of Louan many of whose opinions Pius 5. confuted held the contrary and this is the fourteenth opinion by him expressed and condemned Bellarm. l. 5. c. 19. p. 471. Seuenthly some Popish Doctors against Chrysostome confuted by Bellarmine WHether God doe giue punishment to euill workes beyond the worthines or condignity of them is not so certaine St. Chrysostome seemes to patronage the affirmatiue part but Saint Austin rather tolerates then approues it some others defend the negatiue by foure testimonies of Scripture answered by Bellarm. lib. 5. cap. 19. pag. 472. Eightly Caietane against Dominic a Soto and Bellarm. THough Cardinall Caietane teach that those Clerkes and Monkes sinne not deadly which choose the Romane Breuiary and neglect that Breuiary which is proper to their order and Church yet that opinion is not so safe and sure as Dominicus ● Soto well admonishes except it be by consent of the Bishop and whole Chapter Bellarm. of good workes in particular l. 1. cap. 18. pag. 96. Ninthly Bellarmine against Panormitan VVE answere that Clerkes and Monkes are by Gods law bound to pray and praise God more then others but vnto this forme of prayer and praises which is now in vse they are onely tyed by the determination of the Church as for that which Panormitanus otherwise a learned Lawyer holds that the number of seuen houres for Diuine seruice is determined by Gods law when Dauid saith seuen times a day do I praise thee it is very sleight c. Bellarm. ibid. c. 19. p. 102. Tenthly some Popish Doctors opposed by Bellarmine and Pius 5. and Concil Lateran VVHatsoeuer some Doctors haue formerly thought we say that now doubtlesse those Clerkes which doe not their Diuine offices eyther ought to want the fruits of their Benefices or if they haue receiued them to restore them againe for common Almes or reparations of their Churches and there is a flat Decree for this in the Councell of Lateran Sess. 9. Statuimus and in the constitution of Pius 5. Bellarm. ibid. cap. 19. p. 103. DECAD VII First Bellarmine against Io. Cassianus and some others vn-named ANother opinion for Lent is that of Io. Cassianus who teaches that in the Primitiue Church the Fast was alike all the yeare long after when deuotion grewe cold it pleased all the Priests to appoint the Fast of Lent and to establish it in a firme Law But this opinion is built on a false ground The third opinion is of them who referre the institution of Lent to Pope Telesphorus c. But the only true opinion is that the Lent fast was ordained by the Apostles of Christ and enioyned to the whole Church Bellarm. l 2. of good W. in part c 14. p. 177. Secondly Albertus against Thomas and Bellarmine THough the precept of Almes belong not properly to the tenne commandements since therin onely are contained precepts of iustice Yet Diuines vse to reduce all morall precepts to those ten And some as Albertus vpon 4. dist 15. art 16. reduce the precept of Almes to that commandement Thou shalt not steale Others as Saint Thomas in 2.2 quaest 32. c. Honour thy father and mother which opinion is more probable Bellarmine the third booke cap. 6. pag. 233. Thirdly some graue Diuines against St. Thomas Albertus Richardus Paludanus c. ALthough there be graue Diuines that hold the contrary yet I hold that the truer and safer opinion

Ambrose in his first booke of the holy Ghost Beda vpon 10. chap. of Acts Bernard Epi. 340. ad Henricum Hugo de Sancto victore l. 2. of Sacraments Master of sentenc b. 4. dist 3. And lastly Pope Nicholas in his Epist. to the Bulgarians The two foundations of these Authors opinion are ouerthrowne by Bellarm. who concludeth But howsoeuer it be it is certaine that baptisme is eyther absolutely or with condition to be repeated if it be administred in the name of Christ or any other person without an expresse mention of the rest as all more graue Diuines teach Bellarm. in his b. of Baptisme cap. 3. pag. 11. Seuenthly two contrary opinions of Doctors THat Christ did vse some baptisme before his passion it cannot be denied but the doubt is whether that Baptisme were the same Sacrament which now we haue or onely a preparation to the Sacrament of Baptisme afterwards to be instituted as the baptisme of Iohn was Chrysost. Theophilact and Pope Leo hold with this latter c. But the other which we haue said is more probable which is professedly taught by Augustine tract 13. and 15. vpon Iohn by Cyrill 2. B. vpon Iohn c. 57. Hugo de Sancto victore b. 2. of Sacraments and this is the commoner opinion of Diuines with the Master of Senten b. 4. dist 3. Bellarm ibid. c. 5. p. 26. Eightly Many opinions of Schoolemen NOte that concerning the time wherein Christ instituted the Sacrament of baptisme there are very many opinions among the Schoolemen but the more common and probable opinion is that which we follow which also the Catechisme of the Councell of Trent receiues and the Master of Sent. with St. Thomas and others Bellarmine in his booke of Baptisme c. 5. pag. 28. Ninthly Dominicus a Soto Ledesmius c. against Thomas Maior Gabriel and others THere are some Diuines as Dominicus a Soto and Martin Ledesmius vpon 4. dist 3. which teach that Martyredome doth not giue grace ex opere operato by the very worke wrought but onely ex opere operantis by the worke of the sufferer and giues no degree of grace but that which answers to the merit of the martyres charity But it is a more probable opinion that Martyredome by the very worke wrought doth giue the first grace So that if a man being yet in his sinnes shall come to Martyredome yet without an affection to any sinne and with faith and loue in part begun c By the vertue of Martyredome he shall vpon the worke wrought be iustified and saued So is expresly taught by St. Thomas Io. Maior Gabriel and others Bellarmine same booke cap. 6. pag. 33. Tenthly Bellarmine and all Papists with Thomas against Peter Lombard THere haue been two opinions amongst Catholikes of Iohns Baptisme whereof one is thought erroneous the other very improbable The first was Peter Lombards who distinguishes those which were baptized of Iohn into two kinds one was of them which were so baptized of Iohn that they did put their hope and trust in that baptisme and had not any knowledge of the holy Ghost These he confessed were to be baptised with Christs baptisme The other of those who were baptized of Iohn but did not relie vpon that baptisme and had knowledge of the holy Ghost These were not necessarily to be rebaptized Bellarmine confutes him by himselfe and consent of all Catholikes and concludes wherefore Saint Thomas 3. p. q. 38. ar vlt writes that this is a very vnreasonable opinion Bellarm. ibid. c. 19. p. 113. DECAD III. First Master of Sentences Schoolemen Thomas against Thomas Bellarmine and other Papists ANother opinion is That the baptisme of Iohn was as a certain Sacrament of the old law so taught the Master of Sent. in the place forecited and many of the Schoolemen and Saint Thomas himselfe but he did iustly afterwards recant and teach the contrary 3. part q. 38 art 1. Whereupon Saint Thomas well saith that the baptisme of Iohn pertained not to the old law but to the new rather as a certaine preparation to Christs baptisme Bellarm. ibid. c. 19. p. 113. Secondly Thomas Concil Florentinum Innocentius Waldensis Hugo Bellarmine dissagreeing SOme Schoolemen hold that the Apostles did in diuers fashions minister the Sacrament of confirmation and that in the first times because the holy Ghost visibly descended then they vsed no annointing but meere imposition of hands After that vnction came in vse c. And if you obiect that the Apostles could not institute the matter of a sacrament they answere that they receiued that commaundement from Christ that they should one while vse imposition of hands another while Chrisme as they should thinke most conuenient This answere is not vnlikely and Saint Thomas is not fare off from it 3. p q. 72. art 1. and perhaps hither might be drawne the testimonies of the Florentine Councell and of Innocentius c But the other answer me thinks is more probable of Thomas Waldensis and Hugo de Sancto victore who say that the annointing with Chrisme and laying on of hands is all one for he that anoints layes on his hand This answere is the likelier Bellarmine in his B. of confirmation c. 9. p. 185. Thirdly Caietane Dominicus a Soto Franc. Victoria against all the elder Papists IT is a question among our Diuines whether Balme be required in Chrisme as vpon the necessity of the Sacrament or only on necessity of the precept All the old Diuines and Lawyers hold Balme required vpon the necessity of the Sacrament so as the Sacrament is voyde if it be administred without it But the latter Diuines Caietane Dominicus a Soto Franc. a Victoria c. hold that balme is not required as to the essence of the Sacrament but yet necessarily to be used by the commandement of God Bellarm. ibid. cap. 9. pag. 190. Fourthly Rich. Armachanus against the common opinion OF the Catholikes there is onely Richardus Armachanus which thinkes that the office of confirming is common both to Bishops and Presbiters and from him Tho. Waldensis thinkes that Wickliffe drew his heresie Bellarm. ibid. cap. 12. pag. 197. Fiftly Bonauenture Durand Adrian against Thomas Richard Paludanus Marsilius AMongst our Catholike diuines there is a question whether at least by dispensation a Presbiter may conferre this Sacrament for Saint Bonauenture Durand Adrian vpon 4. dist 7. say it cannot be committed to Priests But Saint Tho mas and all his Schollers and many other Diuines as Richardus Paludanus Marsilius and others and all Canonists teach the contrary and indeede it is the truer that these last affirme Bellarm. ibid. c. 17. p. 197. Sixtly some namelesse Papists against the common opinion IT is questioned whether those things which are spoken of Christ in the forme of bread and wine be spoken of him truly and properly or by some Trope Some thinke them truely and properly spoken as the same thing should be truely and properly spoken

latter opinion seemes the truest which we doe the rather defend because it so much displeaseth our aduersaries and Io. Caluin especially Bellarm. 5. booke of grace and freewill cap. 1. pag. 337. Ninthly Scotus Durandus Gabriel Gregor Ariminensis Capreolus Marsilius Alexander Albert Thomas Bonauent opposite to each other ALl Catholikes agree that no workes meritorious of grace can be done by the onely power of nature and secondly that all our workes before iustification are no sinnes within these bounds some dispute for freewill perhaps more freely and lauishly then were meete as Scotus Durandus Gabriell vpon 2 Sent. d. 28. Others againe giue lesse to it then they should as Gregorius ● Ariminensis Capreolus vpon 2. Sent d. 28. and Marsilius We wil follow that which the greater and grauer sort of Diuines teach namely Alexander Albertus S. Thomas S. Bonauenture c. Bellarm. l. 5. c. 4. p. 351. Tenthly two sorts of namelesse Doctors opposed PErhaps those authors which say that without the helpe of God no tentation can be ouercome and those which hold some may be vanquished without it may be reconciled yet their opinion and speech is more agreeable to Scriptures and Fathers which say no tentation can be ouercome without Gods ayde Bellarm. ibid. c. 7. p. 363. DECAD V. First Bellarmine with Saint Thomas and Bonauenture against some namelesse Doctors FOr the common saying in Schooles To the man that doth what he can God denies not grace I answere that this is well expounded of St. Thomas in 1. 2. q. 109. and Saint Bonauenture in 2. Sent. dist 28. grace is not denied to him that doth his vtmost when a man doth it by working together with Gods grace whereby he is stirred not when he worketh only by the power of nature certainely those which teach that man by doing what he may is by the onely strength of nature prepared to grace eyther thinke that hee may thereby desire and aske grace which is the Pelagians heresie or hold that man by his owne strength may keepe all the morall law c. and this also is Pelagianisme confuted in the former booke Bellarm. l. 6. of grace and freewill c. 6. p. 508. Secondly Bellarmine against Dominicus a Soto SOme Catholikes and especially Dominicus a Soto 2. b. of nat and grace c. 14. denie that our dispositions towards iustification can by any reason be called merits and to be iustified freely they hold to imply a iustification without any merite whatsoeuer But I cannot vnderstand why we should not in that case vse the name of merite especially with that addition of congruity when we speake of works done by the preuenting grace of God Bellarm. of iustification l. 1. c. 21. p. 103. Thirdly Albertus Pighius and the Diuines of Colen against the Councell of Trent and Bellarmine NOt onely Martin Bucer but Albertus Pighius with some others as namely the Diuines of Colen in his second controuersie held this opinion or error rather that there is a double iustice wherby we are formally iustified one imperfect which is in our inherent vertues the other perfect which is Christs righteousnes impured whose opinion is reiected by the Councell of Trent Sess. 6. c. 7. Bellarm. l. 2. of Iustification c. 1. 2. p. 124. Fourthly Gropperus Catharinus Saint Thomas Bonauenture Scotus in three opinions OF this matter concerning certainty of saluation there are 3. opinions or rather falshoods The first of the heretickes of this time that the faithfull may haue such knowledge as that by a sure faith they may know their sinnes forgiuen c. The second is of the Author of the Enchiridion Coloniense which holds that a man both may and ought to be certaine his sinnes are forgiuen but yet he denies that he is iustified by faith alone But this booke is in many other things worthy of the censure of the Church The third is of Ambrosius Catharinus who holds that a man may be certaine of his owne grace euen by the assurance of faith Contrary to these errours is the common opinion of almost all Diuines Saint Thomas S. Bonauenture Scotus Durandus Roffensis Alphonsus a Castro Dominicus a Soto Ruardus c. Nicholas Saunders Thomas Stapleton c. that no man by any certainty of faith be assured of his iustice except those which haue speciall reuelations Bellarm. l. 3. of Iustice c. 3. p. 206. Fiftly the Diuines of Louan and Paris against Catharin HOw Bellarmine presseth Catharinus with the authoritie of the Vniuersities of Paris and Louan and the flat wordes of the Councell of Trent and Catharinus his answeres and elusions of all See Bellarm. ibid. cap. 3. pag. 208. Sixtly Bellarmine against Catharinus CAtharinus his exposition of those places of Ecclesiastes Ecclesiasticus Iob for his purpose see largly confuted by Bellar. Bellar. ib. c. 4. 5. p. 211.212 Seuenthly Catharinus and two rankes of Popish Diuines differing I Say there is no Catholike writer holds that a man should euer doubt of his reconciliation with God for there are three opinions amongst Catholikes One of Ambrosius Catharinus which doth not onely exclude all doubt but addes that the iust man may haue an assurance of his iustification by the certainty of a Diuine faith Another goes not so farre yet holdes that perfect men are wont to attaine vnto that security as that they haue no feare of their iustification as we beleeue without all doubting that there was a Caesar an Alexander c. though we saw them not but this opinion I confesse I like not The third which is more common in the Church takes not away all feare but yet takes away all anxiety and wauering doubfulnes Bellar. l. 3. of iustific c. 11. p. 264 Eightly Andr. Vega against Thom. and other Catholikes ANdr Vega in his 11. booke vpon the Councells c. 20. holds veniall sin to be properly against the Law But veniall sinnes without which we cannot liue are not simply sinnes but imperfectly and in some regards and are not indeede against the law but besides it as St. Thomas teaches well in 1.2 q. 88. Bellarm. l. 4. c. 14. p. 359. Ninthly Robert Holkot against Saint Thomas and the common opinion ALthough some haue taught that freedome of will is not necessary to merite as Robert Holkot held witnesse Io. Picus in his Apologie yet the common opinion of Diuines is contrary as it appeares out of St. Thomas 1.2 quaest 114. and other Doctors vpon 1. Sent. d. 17. c. Bellarm. l. 5. of Iustification c. 10. p. 432. Tenthly a certaine namelesse Author against Pius 5. Peter Lombard and others IT was the opinion of a certaine late Author which was in many points condemned by Pius 5. that eternall life is due to good workes for that they are the true obedience to the law not for that they are done by a person aduanced by grace into the state of the Sonne of God so hee holdes that meritorious workes may be

life Sum. paenit d. 32. fol. 99.2 47. Nauar against some namelesse THat which some hold that a Confessor must so behaue himselfe out of Confession toward the Penitent as if he had neuer heard his confession See confuted by Nauar. Sum. paenit cap. 32. fol. 103.1 48. Nauarre against diuers Confessors SIxe seuerall fashions of Absolution vsed by the Confessors of his time See confuted by Nauar. Sum. Paenit cap. 33. fol. 105.106 c. 49. Nauarre against the common practise THe imposition of hands vpon euery Penitent is not necessary alwaies nor fit to be vsed yea somtime euill See defended by Nauarre As when the penitent is a woman and perhaps sweetely beautiful and delicately attired according to Paludanus in 4. dist 22. quaest 3. Sum. paen 33. fol. 107.1 50. Nauarre against Angelus THat a Confessor may absolue his penitent from his sins and after send him for absolution from his excommunication to his superiour vnto whom that excommunication is reserued is falsely taught by Angelus in ver Confess parag 10. saith Nauarrus Sum. paen 34. fol. 112.1 DECAD VI. 51. Popish Doctors diuided IN this difficult question our Doctors agree not whether a Confessor may absolue a penitent which will not obey him because the penitent followes other Doctors which hold the contrary opinion to the Confessor Some hold that penitent may not be absolued but their opinion is more probable which hold he may Sum. paen 35. fol. 114. 52. Scotus and the Doctors of Paris against Thomas Bonauenture Richardus Durandus c. ALthough many Doctors thinke that no sacramentall satisfaction done out of charity auailes any thing to expiate the punishment for sinne which we owe to God because God accepts not his workes that is infected with mortall sinne and by consequent is his enemy for any satisfaction as St. Thomas Bonauent Richard Durand vpon 4. d. 15.16 Caietan Tom. 1. Opusc. Tract 6. q. 1. Yet it is more truely held by Scotus in 4. d. 15. q. 1. and the Doctors of Paris in the same place that he which is in mortall sin may satisfie for his temporall punishment due to his sinne wip't off by contrition Sum. Paenit 37. fol. 120. 53. Nauarre against Caietane CAietane holdes Tom. 1. Opusc. Tract 6. that a sacramentall satisfaction takes not the like effect afterward which it would haue had if it had beene done in charity But the contrary is truer that such satisfaction by the addition of charity afterward becomes as perfect as if it should haue beene done in it Sum. paen 37. fol. 120.2 54. Thomas Paludanus Maior Almaine Roffensis Anthoninus against Caietane and the truer opinion IN this question so difficult and controuersall amongst our Authours howsoeuer Saint Thomas Paludanus and others vpon 4. dist 20. Maior in 4. dist 17. Almaine in 4. dist 18. Roffensis in his 5. Artic. against Luther and St. Anthoninus 3. p. Tit. 14. cap. 19. hold that the Penitent is bound vpon commaund to accept the penance imposed and hauing once accepted to performe it yet the truer opinion is that the penitent is not bound by precept before he be absolued to accept the penance inioyned by his Confessor But that it is free for him to accept or not accept it and it is enough that he will eyther in this life or in Purgatorie satisfie for his sinnes So Caietane in summa verb. Satisfactio and Hostiensis in summa de paenit remiss saith that onely the Lords prayer is to be inioyned to the penitent to be said for penance rather then he should bee sent away not absolued Sum. paenit cap. 38. fol. 121.1.2 55. Nauar against Richard Anthoninus Syluester c. RIchardus in 4. d. 17. art 2. q. 8 Anthoninus 3. p. Tit. 14. cap. 19. and Syluest verbo confessio are deceiued which hold that vpon meere omission of doing penance confession is to be iterated Sum. paen cap. 38. fol. 124.2 56. Two contrary opinions of Popish Doctors WHether we are bound to confesse veniall sins two opinions are reported by Thomas q. 6. art 3. Franciscus de Victoria Sum. Sacram. de confessione art 129. 57. Innocentius Archidiac Adrian Palud Bonauent against Saint Thomas Fr. Vict. and other Doctors THat a man is bound presently vpon his sinne committed to confesse is held by Innocentius cap. Omnis Archidiacon in cap. ille rex But Saint Thomas and other Doctors hold the contrary and Franciscus de victor ibid. art 133. who addes Adrianus Paludan and Bonauenture set downe some cases wherin a man is bound presently to confesse but I beleeue them not Artic. 136. 58. Fr. Victor against other Diuines THat the pope cannot dispense with the precept of confession see defended against other their Diuines by Victoria art 140. 59. Scotus against Pet. Lombard Thomas Durandus Paludan Richard Gabriel THat we may in an extremity confesse our sinnes to a Lay-man is held by the Master of Sentences 4. d. 17. and Saint Thomas in the same place and in additionibus q. 8. art 2. who cyteth Augustine and Bede by Durandus Paludanus Richardus Gabriel But Scotus defends it not safe to be done in 4. d. 14. art 2. who is confuted by Fr. Victoria art 143. 60. Paludanus Capreolus Durandus against Maior and Fr. Victoria THat any Priest may absolue vs in the point of death stands by the law of God saith Paludanus 4. d. 20. q. 1 and Capreolus d. 19. q. vnica and Durandus It stands onely by a positiue law saith Maior and Fr. Victoria art 156. DECAD VII 61. Io. Maior Bernardus de Gauaco Capreolus and Caietane in three different opinions WHether an imperfect and informe confession be to be repeated are three opinions two extreame and one meane the first of Io. Maior 4 d. 17. q. 3.1 that it must be repeated if it were not entire or wanted of contrition which Victoria cals an intollerable errour The second of Bernardus de Gauaco in impugnat Godofredi quodlib 5 that how imperfect soeuer it be it is not to be repeated The third is more likely of Capreolus d. 17. q. 2. and Caietane which hold that some imperfect confession is to be repeated some not Victor art 157. 62. Fr. Victor against Durandus THat by an imperfect confession the precept of confession is satisfied and fulfilled is denyed in some cases by Durandus 4. dist 17. quaest 14 and 15. affirmed by Fran. Victoria art 163. FINIS Har. Suis ipsa Roma viribus ruit Especially To by Iudith wisd of Salomon Ecclesiasticus Maccabees Euseb. l. 4. c. 25. Exposit. Symboli veteris instrumenti primo omnium Mosis quinque libri c Haec sunt quae patres intra Canonem concluserunt ex quibus fidei nostrae assertiones c. Alij libri sunt qui noa Canonici c. In Prologo galeato Tom. 3. p. 6. Hic prologus Scripturam quasi Galeatū principiū omnibus libris quos de Hebraeo c. Vt