CHAPTER XVI

AN ANSWER TO THE ARGUMENTS WHICH ARE BROUGHT FORWARD AGAINST THE PROPOSITIONS CONTAINED IN THE PRECEDING CHAPTER

AFTER what has been already premised, it will be easy to answer the objections of those who maintain an opinion contrary to ours, and who hold that it is expedient to own property in common. It is certainly well to do so, for the sake of those who are not capable of that height of perfection practised by the faithful of the early Church, amongst whom, however, the imperfect were not wholly neglected. Thus, although they who followed sublime perfection did not own any property; yet, even Our Lord, to whom the angels ministered, kept a purse for the necessities of others, and because His Church was to possess funds, as St. Augustine says in his commentary on St. John's Gospel. Therefore, if there be any congregation of which every member aspires to the highest perfection, it is expedient for such a congregation to own no possessions.

             When, in the next place, it is stated that St. Benedict received ample possessions during his lifetime, this only proves that the possession of common property does not make monastic perfection absolutely impossible. It is no proof whatsoever that it is not more perfect to renounce possessions altogether, especially as St. Benedict declares, in his Rule, that he had, in condescension to the weakness of the monks of his time, mitigated in certain particulars, the rigour of the monastic life as it was ordained by earlier Fathers. The same remark applies to St. Gregory, who built monasteries, according to the rule drawn up by St. Benedict.

             The third argument, viz., that Our Lord allowed His apostles to take with them in time of persecution purse and scrip, tells rather against our opponents, than for them. If, in the time of persecution, the rule was suspended, it proves that the ordinary rule was, that the apostles should take with them neither purse nor scrip. We do not read that in time of persecution the Apostles procured for themselves any possessions in common. Thus the argument of their conduct during persecution is irrelevant to our subject.

             The fourth assertion, viz., that Our Lord did not establish an order of men, possessing nothing, but an order of prelates who owned certain property, is a distinct falsehood. For when Our Lord taught His disciples to possess neither gold, nor silver, lest their hearts should be weighed down by temporal anxieties; and when He promised to those who, for His sake, should renounce lands and houses, a reward, not only in the next world but in this life also, so that they should resemble the Apostles in "having nothing yet possessing all things," He made it clear, that all who should hereafter follow this rule, would be obeying His ordinance. Those who follow the saints who have founded religious orders, are, in reality, imitating not those holy founders but Christ, whose precepts they preach. Our adversaries are either deceived on another point, or else they try to mislead us. Christ did not establish an order of bishops, or other clerics, who were to own property, either in common or individually. He established such an order, indeed, but established it in perfect poverty. Later on, however, possessions were accepted by the Church, in order, as we have seen, to be distributed by her.

             As for the fifth assertion, viz., that Christian perfection has been in abeyance from the time of the Apostles until our own days, it is certain, on the contrary, that far from being in abeyance, Christian perfection has flourished vigorously, both in Egypt and in other parts of the world. No man can set limits to God, or say that He is to draw all men to Himself at the same time, or in the same place; rather does He, according to the wisdom whereby He disposes all things sweetly, provide, at divers seasons, the aids to man's salvation, peculiarly befitting those times. Has Christian teaching failed from the days of the masters and the doctors, Athanasius, Basil, Ambrose, Augustine, and the rest, until our times, in which men are even better instructed than they formerly were, in Christian doctrine? Is it, according to the views of our opponents, unlawful to set again in motion any good work which for a while has been interrupted? If such be the case, it would be unlawful to suffer martyrdom, or to work miracles, since both these good works have, for a time, been in abeyance.

             The sixth argument, viz. that those who possessed no common property, used to live by the work of their hands, is a calumny against others as well as against religious; for, the Apostle who preached the Gospel, maintained himself by manual labour. Is it a sin, then, for Bishops, Archdeacons, and all who are officially bound to preach the Gospel, not to live by the work of their hands? If they are not bound thus to maintain themselves, because St. Paul laboured not out of necessity, but as a work of supererogation, why should that work be enforced upon religious, which was only supererogatory with the holy Fathers? No one can fulfil all works of supererogation; for one thing is superfluous in one man, and another in another man. But, granted that it be not supererogatory, but necessary, that they who own no common property, should live by the work of their hands, that necessity only extends to such labour as may prevent idleness. But idleness is prevented, not only by manual labour, but far more by the study of Holy Scripture; such idleness performs a great work, as St. Augustine says. And the Gloss, on the words of Ps. xlviii., "My eyes have failed," etc., says, "He is not idle who only studies the word of God; neither does he accomplish more who performs external work, than he who exercises himself in the knowledge of divinity. For, wisdom is of all works the greatest."

             Idleness is, also, prevented by the warfare which we wage against the enemies of the Faith, according to St. Paul's injunction: "Labour like a good soldier of Jesus Christ" (2 Tim. ii. 3). This the Gloss interprets to mean, the preaching of the Gospel against the enemies of the Faith. This I acknowledge to be a necessary work, for those who have not otherwise a means of subsistence. For it is lawful for all preachers of the Gospel, even Monks, to live by the Gospel, and by their ministry at the Altar. St. Augustine in his book De opere monachorum asks, whether it be permissible for Monks to have any common property, save what they gain by their own labour. Is it not ridiculous to say, that religious may receive large possessions as alms, and yet may not accept donations, to provide for their simple daily needs? Therefore, no necessity constrains those who do not possess common property, to labour with their hands. We have, however, elsewhere spoken more fully on this point.

             The seventh argument deserves ridicule, rather than reply. For, who does not see, that the task of heaping up riches--a task which seculars can barely achieve--involves far more anxiety of mind, than that of merely procuring from the charity of the faithful, and the mercy of God, a simple daily provision for the necessities of life.

             As for the eighth argument, viz., that religious must occupy themselves about the affairs of those who minister to them, I acknowledge that this is true. But the affairs about which they must be busied, are such as concern the spiritual welfare of their benefactors, or their consolation when they are in trouble. Such solicitude is a work of charity, by no means incompatible with religion. For, as St. James says, "Religion pure and undefiled before God and the Father is this, to visit the orphan and the widow in their tribulation" (Ep. i. 27.)

             The last argument is absolutely worthless. For, the things used by religious for their support, are not absolutely their own property, or under their own control, but are ministered to them for their necessities by those who have the management of such things.

             This is all that occurs to me, at present, to write against the pernicious and erroneous teaching, which deters men from entering religious life. If any man desire to contradict my words, let him not do so by chattering before boys, but let him write, and publish his writings; so that intelligent persons may judge what is true, and may be able to confute what is false by the authority of the Truth.

THE END

Footnotes

   Histoire Ecclesiastique, tom. v. livre 84, n. 42.

   A translation of another Opusculum of St. Thomas has recently been published by Messrs. Sands and Co. under the title, The Religious State, the Episcopate, and the Priestly Office.

   Exod. xiv. 21, 22.

   Dan. iii. 94.

   Ibid. 95.

   Ibid. 100.

   John xii. 24, 25.

   Acts v. 35-39.

   Malach. iii. 2, 3.

   1 Cor. iv. 11-13.

   John xv. 20.

   Ibid. 19.

   Matt. x. 23.

   John xvi. 33.

   Luke xii. 32.

   Matt. iii. 12.

   In the Parma Edition of the Opera Omnia they are the first and third of the Opuscula, the one on the "Perfection of the Spiritual Life" being the second. All three are to be found in vol. xv. of the Parma Edition of 1874.

   Constit. Fratrum Praedicatorum, Prolog. Decl. i.

   He died A.D. 1221.

   Ch. xvii. 21.

   Tom. xv. saec. xiii. et xiv. cap. iii. art. 7, p. 177. (Edit. Paris, 1744).

   2nd Ep. iii. 1-7.

   Cap. xxvi. p. 102 (Edit. Parma, 1864), English translation, page 164 (The Religious State, the Episcopate, and the Priestly Office).

   xxvii. 17.

   1 Kings xvii.

   La Vie de S. Thomas d'Aquin, livre ii. chap. ix. p. 129. (Edit. Paris, 1740.)

   Historia Ecclesiastica, saec. xiii. et xiv. tom. xv. p. 178, (Edit. Paris, 1744).

   Natalis Alexander, ibid. p. 179.

   Ibid.

   La Vie de S. Thomas, p. 132. (Edit. Citat.)

   Natalis Alexander, loc. cit. p. 181.

   The Religious State, The Episcopate, and the Priestly Office (Sands and Co.).

   Chap. xvi.

   S. Thomas of Aquin: His Life and Labours, vol. i. p. 749.

   S. Thomas of Aquin: His Life and Labours, vol. i. p. 720.

   i.e., the glory of God, and the salvation of men.--EDITOR.

   St. Thomas refers to William of St. Amour and his supporters. In this and the following chapter, he recapitulates the propositions sustained by St. Amour, chiefly in his "De periculis temporum novissimorum," which he afterwards proceeds in the succeeding chapters to refute. See Introduction, page 26.--EDITOR.

   An allusion to the heretic Diotrephes. See p. 211.--EDITOR.

   S. Thomas here divides this work into three parts. (1) The first part is the shortest, and consists of the first chapter only. (2) The second part contains six chapters, i.e. Chapter ii. to Chapter vii. (3) The remaining Chapters (viii. to xxviii.) constitute the third part of the treatise. The whole is summed up in a brief EPILOGUE, as it is introduced by this short PROLOGUE.--EDITOR.

   St. Thomas treats this question at greater length in The Religious State, the Episcopate, and the Priestly Office.--EDITOR.

   i.e., with regard to the object of its foundation, and the facilities which it offers for the attainment of that object, as the author goes on to explain.--EDITOR.

   According to the well-known method of St. Thomas, in this and the following articles, or chapters, he first states the objections of William of St. Amour, and then replies to them.--EDITOR.

   For the explanation of this form of citation, see The Religious State, the Episcopate, and the Priestly Office, page 50, note.--EDITOR.

   An allusion to the military orders existing in the Church in the middle ages.--EDITOR.

   William of St. Amour maintained that it was unlawful for religious to teach at the Universities. St. Thomas, in this article replies to the arguments with which he upheld this contention.--EDITOR.

   "Who has not the cure (or care) of souls," i.e. to whom the spiritual charge of a parish or district is not committed by the Church. According to the ordinary ecclesiastical law, religious do not, unless for exceptional reasons, undertake the care of a parish. In case of need, or in countries where there is a paucity of secular priests (as in England and America), this law is in abeyance.--EDITOR.

   The Chorepiscopi are again spoken of by our author, and their office is described by him. See page 128. Their origin is uncertain; but there is no record of them before the fourth century. It is generally thought that they were not, as a rule, really bishops, but priests who assisted the bishops in distant or country parts of their dioceses. They were vicars of the bishop. They had power to confer minor orders, probably even the subdiaconate. They made visitations for the bishops, attended to the different institutions connected with the Church and the poor, and, in their respective districts, helped in the administration of the diocese to which they belonged, and to the bishop of which they were subject. As St. Thomas reminds his readers (page 128), abuses having crept in through their unjustifiable "usurpation of the episcopal office," they were suppressed in the ninth, or early tenth century.--EDITOR.

   The Fourth Lateran, or Twelfth Ecumenical, Council, held under Pope Innocent III. A.D. 1215 (Canon xxi.).--EDITOR.

   For hearing confessions, preaching, and the administration of sacraments, jurisdiction is needed as well as valid ordination; i.e. the care of souls must be given by one to whom they are entrusted. In ecclesiastical language a priest, although properly ordained, must receive "Faculties" from the Bishop of a diocese, or for the entire church, from the Pope: see p. 113.--EDITOR.

   These are called Reserved Cases. Some cases are reserved to the Pope, others to the Bishop. In order to absolve from these, special leave is required from the Pope or the Bishop, over and above the "faculties" which are ordinarily given.--EDITOR.

   According to the present discipline of the Church every priest who has received unrestricted faculties from a Bishop is regarded as "a vicegerent appointed by him." He consequently may hear the confessions of any subject of the Bishop who is free to come to him. This applies to all times of the year. The Confessor, for the purpose of confession, by virtue of the faculty received becomes the penitent's "own priest."--EDITOR.

   St. Thomas in The Religious State, the Episcopate, and the Priestly Office devotes a chapter (xix.) to the elucidation of this question.--EDITOR.

   A name given to the heretics who professed the Gnostic, Manichaean, and cognate errors. The precursors of the Albigences are sometimes called Cathari.--EDITOR.

   In the first part of this Chapter St. Thomas recalls five propositions of William of St. Amour, and reproduces the arguments with which he upheld them. In the second part of the Chapter he examines the propositions, and refutes the arguments. The five propositions were: (1) Religious may not live on alms. (2) They may not accept offerings made to them. (3) They may not beg. (4) Preachers who are religious may not receive stipends. (5) Alms ought not to be given to religious.--EDITOR.

   St. John's words are: "I had written perhaps to the church; but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the pre-eminence amongst them, doth not receive us. Wherefore, if I come, I will publish his works which he doeth, prating against us with malicious words: and, as if these things were not enough for him, neither doth he himself receive the brethren; and those that do receive them he forbiddeth, and casteth out of the church. Dearly beloved, follow not that which is evil, but that which is good" (3rd Epistle, v. 9, 10, 11).--EDITOR.

   This and the remaining chapters of the treatise form the third part of St. Thomas's apology for the Religious Orders. In them, as will be seen, he repeats the further objections of William of St. Amour against the religious; he then proceeds to refute them.--EDITOR.

   These words of Ps. xci. are given in the Latin as quoted by our author, as the rendering in the English version bears a totally different sense, to that given to it in St. Thomas's text. Cornelius a Lapide, in his Commentary, reminds us that in St. Jerome's translation the word is frondentes, that the Hebrew word rahanim means virentes et florentes and frondentes; and that bene patientes is the form given to it by the Latin interpreter, who laid stress upon the meaning of the word, rather than the strict and literal translation. St. Thomas, quoting from the Latin version, uses the word patientes in its primary and conventional signification.--EDITOR.

   In his SUMMA THEOLOGICA (1a Par. Quaest. lx. Art. 1, Ad. 1m), St. Thomas explains the "threefold truth" as being: (1) the truth which is natural to us, or natural knowledge (veritas naturalis cognitionis); (2) the truth which we acquire, or acquired knowledge (veritas cognitionis acquisitae); and (3) infused truth, or knowledge (veritas cognitionis infusae).

             In the same SUMMA THEOLOGICA, (2da 2dae Quaest. clxxx. Art. 3, Ad. 4m) our author tells us that the knowledge of this triple truth comes to us from God, from man, and through our own study. Consequently to arrive at the knowledge of the triple truth we need (1) prayer ("I prayed, and there came to me the spirit of wisdom," Wisdom vii. 7); (2) hearing ("secundum quod accipit ex voce loquentis"); and (3) reading ("secundum quod accipit ex eo quod per Scripturam est traditum").--EDITOR

   Josue. "Valiant in war was Jesus the son of Nave who was successor of Moses among the prophets, who was great according to his name. Very great for saving the elect of God, to overthrow the enemies that rose up against them, that he might get the inheritance for Israel" (Ecclus. xlvi. 1. 2).--EDITOR.

   The "Introduction to the Eternal Gospel," as it was called, was the production of an anonymous writer (supposed to be a Friar), who, having become impregnated with the teaching of Abbot Joachim, himself a visionary, professed to foretell the future. Amongst other absurd, and even heretical propositions, which he broached, were the following. The doctrine of Abbot Joachim was to supersede that of Jesus Christ. As the Old Testament had given place to the New, so the New Testament was to be supplanted in the year 1260. Then would begin the third epoch of the world, over which the Holy Ghost would preside. Another Gospel and another priesthood would then take the place of the old. These were to be the days of perfection. A new religious order, greater than all the others (that of the Minims), would become the supreme spiritual power amongst all orders in the Church.

             The "Introduction to the Eternal Gospel" was submitted to the Holy See for condemnation by William of St: Amour and his party. Having been examined by two Dominicans, at the instance of the Sovereign Pontiff, it was condemned, and (like the "Perils of the last times" of St. Amour) it was publicly burned.

             The history of the "Introduction to the Eternal Gospel" is given by Touron in his "Vie de St. Thomas d'Aquin," Livre ii. chap. xii. pag. 143 (Edit. Paris, M.D.C.C.X.L.).--EDITOR.

   An allusion to a practice of the Church in the early ages which is now obsolete. On the Wednesday of the Fourth week of Lent the "Scrutinium baptizandorum," or examination of those who were to be baptised on Holy Saturday, took place. This ceremony was a very solemn one, and was announced to the people on the previous Sunday. The Catechumens stood at the church doors, the men on the right, and the women on the left. They were asked by the deacon or priest whether they wished to be baptised, the exorcist having first questioned them as to whether they renounced Satan, his works, and his pomps. Then they were examined in the Lord's prayer and the Creed, which they were obliged to know by heart. If the examination proved satisfactory, they were introduced into the nave of the church with a view to their being baptised on the Eve of Easter Day. As the Gloss expresses it in the text, they were thus "conceived on the Wednesday of the Fourth week." Then, after further instruction, they were "born into spiritual light on Holy Saturday," i.e. they were baptised. For the details of this ceremony the reader is referred to Durandus, "Rationale Divinorum Officiorum," cap. 56, page 208, and also "Explicatio Divinorum Officiorum," cap. 90, page 348 (Edit. Venice, 1609).--EDITOR.

   In many religious orders the members rise at midnight to sing, or recite, matins,--"I arose in the middle of the night to confess to thee" (Ps. 118)--but from Easter to Pentecost the midnight office is suspended, and matins are either anticipated or postponed. No fasting days occur between Easter Sunday and the Eve of Pentecost.--EDITOR.

   The English version of this text is somewhat vague. Sedebit solitarius et tacebit, quia levabit se super se, is rendered, "He shall sit solitary and hold his peace because he hath taken it up upon himself." St. Thomas interprets it as meaning, "he shall arise above himself," i.e. above nature and nature's promptings. It implies the supernatural life of grace.--EDITOR.

   This verse, as given in the English version of the Vulgate, runs: "Son, if thou desire wisdom, keep justice and God will give her to thee."--EDITOR.

   The Council of Trent (Sess. 25, Cap. 15.) forbids religious, of either sex, to take the prescribed vows until they have completed their sixteenth year, and have had at least a year's probation. Religious vows made before that age are null and void. Pope Pius IX. by an Encyclical Letter (Ad Universalis, etc.), dated Feb. 7, 1861, ordered that three years must elapse between the first, or simple, profession, to which we have just referred, and the final, or solemn, profession.--EDITOR.

   The force of the argument seems to lie in this, that if a youth has sufficient control of his reason to be guilty of sin, and so to bind himself to the devil, he is equally capable of doing good by binding himself, in religion, to God.--EDITOR.

   Religio is said to be derived either from re-ligare, or from re-eligere. The former word means "to bind again," the latter "to choose again." The first binding or choice was made by the vows of baptism, the second is made by the religious profession.--EDITOR.

   i.e. the Opusculum which forms the volume recently published under the title, The Religious State, the Episcopate, and the Priestly Office.--EDITOR.

   i.e. the worship of God.--EDITOR.

   See note, page 442.

   Devotio, or devotion, is derived from devovere, which means to devote or consecrate oneself. The word, consequently, implies voluntary service.--EDITOR.

   According to the jus Romanum, or ancient Roman law, all, of either sex, under the age of twenty-five, are MINORS.--EDITOR.

   See page 144 in the first part of this volume.--EDITOR.

The Religious State, the Episcopate, and the Priestly Office

THE RELIGIOUS STATE

THE EPISCOPATE

AND

THE PRIESTLY OFFICE

BY

SAINT THOMAS AQUINAS

A Translation of

The Minor Work of the Saint on

THE PERFECTION OF THE SPIRITUAL LIFE

EDITED, WITH PREFATORY NOTICE, BY

THE VERY REV. FATHER PROCTER, S.T.M.

EX-PROVINCIAL OF THE ENGLISH DOMINICANS

THE NEWMAN PRESS

WESTMINSTER, MARYLAND

1950

  Nihil obstat

F. J. PROCTER, O.P., S.T.M.

  Imprimatur

HERBERTUS CARDINALIS VAUGHAN

Archiepiscopus Westmonasteriensis

All rights reserved

Printed in the United States of America

Manufactured by

Universal Lithographers, Inc.

Baltimore, Md.

PREFATORY NOTICE

AMONGST the seventy-two Opuscula, or minor works, of St. Thomas Aquinas there are three which treat of the religious life and calling. The first of these is now offered to the English reader. The two others have a special interest of their own. They were the outcome of the historic controversy on the religious orders, raised, in St. Thomas's day, by a powerful and influential anti-regular party, of which William of St. Amour was the recognised and indomitable champion and leader. These two Opuscula will appear in English in a subsequent volume. I venture to predict that they will not fail to attract the attention of many readers in the English-speaking world. They are more than old enough to have made history, yet they are singularly appropriate and apposite to-day--more than six hundred years after they were written--when, as in the thirteenth century, the religious orders are again on their trial in several countries in Europe.

             Touron is of opinion that the treatise which follows these words was written after the other two, or, at least, after the first of them. Echard is of the same mind. The order of reproduction is transposed in this translation, not as challenging this view, but for the obvious reason that the generality of English readers will be more interested in following the controversy, when they have clearly realised the meaning and object of the religious life, as explained in the following pages.

             There is no intrinsic evidence to show that the treatise on "The Perfection of the Spiritual Life" formed part of the controversy to which I have alluded. It was, apparently, written in the days of peace. It was, evidently, composed before the other two, or at least before one of them. The Saint refers to it in the "Contra Impugnantes." "Although we have said much on this subject in another of our little books on PERFECTION, we are not ashamed to repeat what we have written" (chapter xi.). The learned Dominican also treats of the Religious Life in his SUMMA THEOLOGICA (2da 2dae Quaest. 186 to 189), but in a more concise and scholastic manner than in the following pages.

             His style in this tract is more discursive; whilst, at the same time, he retains his own peculiarly argumentative form. It has been called "a constructive treatise." It is, however, analytic as well as synthetic. In it, as the reader will perceive, the author, without unnecessarily multiplying his pages, discusses the object of the religious life, which is the attainment of the love of God in a higher degree than is compatible with the cares of a life spent in the world. He treats of the helps to this growth in charity, that is "the vows of perfection," as they are called, by which the religious man or woman renounces worldly goods, earthly pleasures, and even his or her own will. He speaks of the duties which religious owe to their fellow men. Incidentally St. Thomas draws a distinction between the perfection which is expected of a religious, and the perfection which belongs to the episcopal state, showing that Bishops are in a higher state of perfection than are religious; and that, yet, for reasons given in chapter xix., the one state may be ambitioned, but the other must not be coveted. The Saint, also, proves in the five subsequent chapters that although priests are engaged in a holier work than are contemplative religious, and although individual priests may be more perfect than individual monks or nuns, yet the priesthood is not a state of perfection.

             This short treatise on their life will be of spiritual help to religious men and women, whether cloistered or leading an active life in the world. It will be to them, in the words of St. Augustine's Rule, "a mirror" into which they can look and see whether they are falling short of the Ideal. So that, if they find that they are thoughtless and negligent, they may "grieve over the past; they may be guarded in the future; they may pray that their debt be cancelled, and that they be not led astray by temptation." If, on the other hand, "they are following that which is written, they can give thanks to God, the giver of all good things."

             This little book will, I doubt not, be of spiritual help to Bishops and to priests, reminding them of the sacredness either of their state or of their vocation.

             These pages, from the pen of "the Angel of the Schools," together with The Apology for the Religious Orders, which may be regarded as the sequel of the present little volume, will, also, serve as a mine of wealth to chaplains of nuns, and to preachers of retreats to religious. It is a quarry, from which they may, one and all, draw the stones with which to build up the edifice of the spiritual life and of religious perfection--that life which must necessarily be "built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief corner-stone; in whom all the building framed together groweth unto a holy temple in the Lord" (Eph. ii. 20, 21).

JOHN PROCTER, O.P.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFATORY NOTICE

PART I.

THE PERFECTION OF THE SPIRITUAL LIFE

PROLOGUE

I.  That the perfection of the spiritual life is to be understood absolutely (simpliciter) according to charity.

II.  Perfection is understood to mean, both the love of God, and the love of our neighbour

III. Of the perfection of Divine love which exists in God alone

IV.  Of the perfection of Divine love which exists in those who have attained to beatitude

V.  Of the perfection of Divine love which is necessary to salvation

VI.  The perfection of Divine love which is a matter of counsel

VII. Of the first means of perfection, viz.: the renunciation of earthly possessions

VIII. Of the second means of perfection which is the renunciation of earthly ties and of matrimony

IX.  Aids to the preservation of chastity

X.  Of the third means of perfection, viz.: the abnegation of our own will

XI.  The three means of perfection, of which we have hitherto been speaking, belong peculiarly to the religious state

XII. Refutation of the errors of those who presume to detract from the merit of obedience, or of vows

XIII. The perfection of brotherly love which is necessary for salvation

XIV. The perfection of love of our neighbour considered as a matter of counsel

XV.  What is required to constitute the state of perfection

XVI. The state of perfection is a condition befitting bishops and religious

XVII. The episcopal office is more sacred than is the religious life

XVIII. An answer to certain arguments which may seem to call in question the perfection of the episcopal state

XIX. The episcopal office, although a state of greater perfection than is the religious life, is, nevertheless, not to be coveted

XX.  Arguments used by certain men to prove that parish priests and archdeacons are in a state of higher perfection than are religious. Answers to these arguments

XXI. Other arguments used to overthrow the conclusion at which we have arrived

XXII. Showing that the liability to suspension does not suffice to prove, that parish priests or archdeacons are in a state of perfection

XXIII. An answer to the foregoing arguments, in which an attempt was made to show that archdeacons and parish priests are in a higher degree of perfection than are religious

XXIV. An answer to the argument, whereby certain persons endeavour to prove that the defect of a solemn blessing or consecration does not hinder archdeacons or parish priests from being in a state of perfection

XXV. An answer to the arguments which are brought forward, to prove that the power of an archdeacon or parish priest to resign his duties is no hindrance to his being in a state of perfection

XXVI. Concerning the works that a religious may lawfully undertake

Prologue

THE RELIGIOUS STATE, ETC.

OR

THE PERFECTION OF THE SPIRITUAL LIFE

OPUSCULUM XVIII. (PARMA EDITION II.)

THE PERFECTION OF THE SPIRITUAL LIFE

PROLOGUE

IN WHICH IS SET FORTH THE AUTHOR'S INTENTION IN UNDERTAKING THIS WORK

As certain persons, who know nothing about perfection, have, nevertheless, presumed to publish follies concerning this state, it is our purpose to draw up a treatise on perfection, explaining what is meant by the term; how perfection is acquired; what is the state of perfection; and what are the employments befitting those who embrace this state.