Sotus, Angelus, and others, say that it is binding on every festival... on the other hand, CastroPalao and others commonly deny it, and with greater probability.-(Ibid. § 3. n. 133.)

Sotus and Valentia say that it is binding when an adult is about to be baptized. But it is objected, that it is not necessary on account of baptism, because for that sacrament attrition1 is sufficient... (Ibid. § 4. n. 134.)

Sotus, Valentia, and Tolet, say that it is binding when any one has received a benefit from God. To this it is opposed, that in such a case it will be sufficient to return thanks; for thus he satisfies what is due to propriety."

Bannez says that it is binding when any one wishes to receive the eucharist. It is objected, that no such command is to be found, and that a state of grace is sufficient for receiving the eucharist."

Not knowing, therefore, amidst such a vast

4 Attrition- a regret for having offended God, induced by a fear of his punishment.

5

"Sotus, Valentia, Toletus dicunt obligare, quando quis beneficium à Deo accepit. Contra est, quia tunc sufficiet gratias agere; sic enim satisfit honestati debitæ." - Tom. I. Pars II. Lib. ii. de Fide, Tr. 3. c. 1. Quæst. 37. § 8. n. 138.

6" Bannez dicit tum obligare, quando quis vult Eucharistiam sumere. Contra est, quia tale præceptum nullibi extat, et ad eucharistiam sufficit status gratiæ."—Ibid. § 10.

n. 140.

variety of opinions, when and how often God must be loved, let us choose the safer part...

In order that we may be justified, we are obliged to love God. If the sacrament (of penitence) be not received, I grant it: if it be received, I deny it. And this is the privilege of the new grace which Christ has added, that by virtue of the sacrament, justification may be obtained even without love.8

SECT. IX.

IDOLATRY.

GABRIEL VASQUEZ.

De Cultu Adorationis, Libri Tres. Moguntiæ, 1614.

The more true opinion is, that all inanimate and irrational things may be legitimately worshipped. If the doctrine which we have established be rightly understood, not only may a

7 66

Itaque cum in tantâ sententiarum varietate nesciamus quandò et quoties sit diligendus Deus, arripiamus tutiora ..." Ibid. § 11. n. 141.

8 "Pro justificatione manet obligatio amoris Dei, si non suscipiatur sacramentum (Pœnitentiæ), concedo: si hoc suscipiatur, nego. Et hoc est privilegium novæ gratiæ, quam addidit Christus, ut etiam sine amore possit vi sacramenti obtineri justificatio."-Tom. VI. Lib. vi. Pars II. Tr. 4. c. 1. Dub. 2. de Contritione, Quæst. 119. n. 865. (Coloniæ Agr. 1724. Ed. Mus. Brit.)

painted image, and every holy thing set forth by public authority for the worship of God, be properly adored with God as the image of himself; but also any other thing of this world, whether it be inanimate and irrational, or in its nature rational, and devoid of danger.—(Lib. iii. Disp. 1. c. 2.)

Why may we not adore and worship with God, apart from danger, any thing whatsover of this world; for God is in it according to his essence, and preserves it continually by his power; and when we bow down ourselves before it and impress it with a kiss, we present ourselves before God, the Author of it, with the whole soul, as unto the prototype of the image? Neither is it in one manner only that the creature may be lawfully worshipped, by uniting it in thought with God or a saint... The first is by representation; as in an image. The second is by actual, but past contact; as the things which touched Christ or a saint, the cross, the nails, the vesture, and other things. A third is, when the thing which is worshipped appertained to the saint; such as reliques of his body. For every one may thus represent to himself, in the inanimate thing which he adores-in an image, a vesture, or a bone---the presence and union of the rational thing itself (as Christ or a saint.) To these instances we may add a fourth. Since every thing of this world is the work of God, and God is always abiding and

working in it, we may more readily conceive him to be in it, than a saint in the vesture which belonged to him. And, therefore, without regarding in any way the dignity of the thing created, to direct our thoughts to God alone, while we give to the creature the sign and mark of submission by a kiss or prostration, is neither cain nor superstitious, but an act of the purest religion.-(Ibid.)

SECT. X.

LICENTIOUSNESS.

EMMANUEL SA.

Aphorismi Confessariorum. Coloniæ, 1590. (Coloniæ, 1615. Ed. Coll. Sion.)

Potest et fœmina quæque, et mas, pro turpi corporis usu, pretium accipere et petere; et qui promisit, tenetur solvere. (Aphorismi, verbo Luxuria, n. 16.)

Copulari ante benedictionem aut nullum, aut leve peccatum est, (etsi quidam mortale esse putant,) quin etiam expedit, si multum illa differatur.--(Ibid. verbo Debitum conjugale, n.6.)

In the edition of 1615, the words, aut nullum, are omitted.

CORNELIUS À LAPIDE.

Commentaria in Danielem Prophetam. Parisiis, 1622. (Antverpiæ, 1625. Ed. Coll. Sion.)

In hæc verba Susannæ (apud Danielem c. xiii. v. 22.) Si enim hoc egero, mors mihi est... In hac vi et metu infamiæ mortisque, poterat Susanna dicere: Non consentio actui, sed patiar et tacebo, ne me infametis et adigatis ad mortem, uti dicam, v. 23. Quanquam fortè Susanna id vel non sciebat, vel non cogitabat. Sic enim honestæ castæque virgines putant se esse reas, seque consensisse lenonibus, si non clamore, manibus totisque viribus eis reluctentur et resistant... (In Danielem, c. 13. v. 22.)

Peccasset Susanna consentiendo et cooperando, puta commiscendo se senibus, quod ipsi petebant, v. 20. Potuisset tamen in tanto periculo infamiæ et mortis negativè se habere, ac permittere in se eorum libidinem, modò interno actu in eam non consensisset, sed eam detestata et execrata fuisset, quia majus bonum est fama et vita, quàm pudicitia: unde hanc pro illâ exponere licet. Itaque non tenebatur ipsa exclamare. Quod ergo exclamarit, nulloque modo libidinem eorum in se permiserit, actus fuit insignis et heroicæ castitatis.--(Ibid. c. 13. v. 23.)