And yet, provided this metaphysical comparison be not drawn, any one may, according to your authors, give away a benefice, and receive money in return for it, without being guilty of simony.Such is the way in which you sport with religion, in order to gratify the worst passions of men; and yet only see with what gravity your Father Valentia delivers his rhapsodies in the passage cited in my letters.He says: "One may give a spiritual for a temporal good in two ways- first, in the way of prizing the temporal more than the spiritual, and that would be simony; secondly, in the way of taking the temporal as the motive and end inducing one to give away the spiritual, but without prizing the temporal more than the spiritual, and then it is not simony.And the reason is that simony consists in receiving something temporal as the just price of what is spiritual.If, therefore, the temporal is sought- si petatur temporale- not as the price, but only as the motive determining us to part with the spiritual, it is by no means simony, even although the possession of the temporal may be principally intended and expected- minime erit simonia, etiamsi temporale principaliter intendatur et expectetur." Your redoubtable Sanchez has been favoured with a similar revelation; Escobar quotes him thus: "If one give a spiritual for a temporal good, not as the price, but as a motive to induce the collator to give it, or as an acknowledgement if the benefice has been actually received, is that simony? Sanchez assures us that it is not." In your Caen Theses of 1644 you say: "It is a probable opinion, taught by many Catholics, that it is not simony to exchange a temporal for a spiritual good, when the former is not given as a price." And as to Tanner, here is his doctrine, exactly the same with that of Valentia; and I quote it again to show you how far wrong it is in you to complain of me for saying that it does not agree with that of St.Thomas, for he avows it himself in the very passage which I quoted in my letter: "There is properly and truly no simony," says he, "unless when a temporal good is taken as the price of a spiritual;but when taken merely as the motive for giving the spiritual, or as an acknowledgement for having received it, this is not simony, at least in point of conscience." And again: "The same thing may be said, although the temporal should be regarded as the principal end, and even preferred to the spiritual; although St.Thomas and others appear to hold the reverse, inasmuch as they maintain it to be downright simony to exchange a spiritual for a temporal good, when the temporal is the end of the transaction."Such, then, being your doctrine on simony, as taught by your best authors, who follow each other very closely in this point, it only remains now to reply to your charges of misrepresentation.You have taken no notice of Valentia's opinion, so that his doctrine stands as it was before.But you fix on that of Tanner, maintaining that he has merely decided it to be no simony by divine right; and you would have it to be believed that, in quoting the passage, I have suppressed these words, divine right.This, fathers, is a most unconscionable trick; for these words, divine right, never existed in that passage.You add that Tanner declares it to be simony according to positive right.But you are mistaken; he does not say that generally, but only of particular cases, or, as he expresses it, in casibus a jure expressis, by which he makes an exception to the general rule he had laid down in that passage, "that it is not simony in point of conscience,"which must imply that it is not so in point of positive right, unless you would have Tanner made so impious as to maintain that simony, in point of positive right, is not simony in point of conscience.But it is easy to see your drift in mustering up such terms as "divine right, positive right, natural right, internal and external tribunal, expressed cases, outward presumption," and others equally little known; you mean to escape under this obscurity of language, and make us lose sight of your aberrations.
同类推荐
热门推荐
厉少,你老婆又淘气了!
他是权倾帝都的尊贵男人,冷酷霸道,只手遮天。意外遇上她,宠起老婆来,连亲妈都不放过。人人都羡慕她,却不知道他的宠爱让她很伤神。“不准穿露背装,裙摆不能高于膝盖。不准拍吻戏,不准与男艺人有身体接触,每晚八点必须到家。”从中小学讲坛成长起来的杰出人物
“中小学教师大有作勾。”这是温家宝总理对广大教师和免费师范生说的话。古今中外,从中小学讲坛成长起来许多烛照千秋的杰出人物,党和国家领导人毛泽东、邓颖超,科学家钱伟长,文学家鲁迅,教育家蔡元培等,都曾在三尺讲台留下自己的身影。中小学教学经历能够成为奋发求索、拼搏进取的动力源泉;中小学讲坛能够为有志青年提供施展才华、实现抱负的广阔舞台。教中小学也能出大师,平凡的岗位成就不平几的人生!空地导弹科技知识(上)(青少年高度关注的导弹武器科技)
导弹是一种依靠制导系统来控制飞行轨迹的可以指定攻击目标,甚至追踪目标动向的无人驾驶武器,其任务是把战斗部装药在打击目标附近引爆并毁伤目标,或在没有战斗部的情况下依靠自身动能直接撞击目标,以达到毁伤的效果。也就是说,导弹是依靠自身动力装置推进,由制导系统导引、控制其飞行路线,并导向目标的武器。