Explicit and implicit faith; what is owed to prelates and to the canonized

But it is evident from what has been said that neither follows, but its opposite.¹ For which it must be noted that faith is taken now for the act of believing by which one believes, now for the habit of believing through which one believes, and now for the truth which is believed, as Augustine teaches, De Trinitate 13, chapters 2 and 3.² Second, it must be noted that one faith is the faithful man’s explicit credencecredulitas: credence, and another is implicit faith: as a catholic having the habit of faith, infused or acquired, believes explicitly the catholic church in general, and in that general faith believes implicitly or indistinctly every singular thing contained under holy mother church; just as logicians truly say that, in knowing that being is in its analogue, they know all things and each one in general.³ So (as I have often said), if any Christian has faith formedfides formata / informis: formed faith / unformed faith by charitycaritas: charity, however general, it suffices, with the virtue of perseverance, for salvation. For God, who gave the first faith, will give a clearer one, unless the faithful man puts an obstacle in the way. For God does not require that all his sons, through the whole of their wayfaringviacio: wayfaring, should think continually in a particular act of each particle of the faith; but 43it is enough that, sloth set aside, they have faith formed in habit.⁴ From these things it is clear, third, that every faithful layman is bound to believe that he has Christ as his priest, rector, bishop and popepapa: pope, and so of the other holy vicars of Christvicarius Christi: vicar of Christ. But, coming to the difficulty, the answer isdicitur multipliciter: is said in many ways: since acts belong to singular supposits, and our faithful lay people communicate with their presbyterssacerdos / presbiter: priest / presbyter and curatescuratus: curate, it is necessary that they have faith about them; therefore lay people are bound, of some of their superiorsprepositi: superiors, to believe at least implicitly that they are parts of the churchecclesia: church and their heads, and of others they are not bound; and each member [of this division] can be subdivided: either they are bound to believe so of them according to present justice, or without qualificationsimpliciter / secundum quid: without qualification / in a certain respect according to predestination.⁵ Then the answer is that lay people are not bound to believe otherwise of their superior than the truth. It is clear thus: no one is bound to believe anything except what God moves him to believe; now God does not move a man to believe what is false; therefore he ought not to believe what is false. For although good sometimes comes from false faith, and God moves to the substance of the act, yet God does not so move a man that he is deceived (as is clear in the sixth book, the treatise on lying, chapter⁶

From these things it is clear, second, that a pastor is bound to admonish his subjects by the instruction of virtuous works, so that they may give him credence that he is such [a part of the church].⁷ It is clear from this: that otherwise, in accepting such an office, he would sin mortally; indeed, by bringing enemies into the church, the house of God, he would be a traitor to his God. When, therefore, a subject does not know such fruitful works of his superior, he is not bound to believe that he is such. But if he knows them implicitly, he is bound to believe proportionately; and when 44he knows them explicitly, then he is bound to believe that he is such according to present justice, and, with misgivingformido (sine / cum formidine): misgiving and conditionally, that he is such without qualification (as was said above of our pope). For God has not so burdened his church that it is necessitated to believe what is false of its superiors when they give no matter for so believing.⁸

To the other difficulty, about the canonizationcanonizare: canonize of saints, it is clear that the answer must in a way correspond. For although there is stronger evidenceevidencia: evidence, from the testimony of the Roman church, that the person whom it canonizes is a membermembrum: member of the church triumphant, and fuller evidence if God works miracles for the saint, yet in both cases, in such a matter, there can be illusion. For just as, by the confession of the church’s laws, the [church] militantecclesia militans / triumphans / dormiens: the church militant / triumphant / sleeping itself deceives and is deceived (as is clear in the fifth book of the Decretals, on the sentence of excommunication, A nobis), so far that it sometimes excommunicates many who are loosed and very acceptable as regards God: so it happens that it absolves some and enrols them in the catalogue of the saints, when before God they are most justly condemned.⁹ Therefore God forbid that a Christian should believe that it is of necessity for salvation that every faithful man believe explicitly of this man, and of whomever our church canonizes, that by that very fact he is blessed; for then we should have a creedsymbolum: creed far too long. Nor ought we to believe explicitly of any such man that he is not a saint; but [we ought to proceed] by sifting our consideration of such men, adhering to the side more probable to us, believing with a condition, or piously doubting with misgiving. Of some saints, though, we believe without misgiving, even explicitly, that they are saints, as of the apostles, the martyrs and the saints of the primitive church; but of others, 45more modern ones, who are canonized by reason of kinship, gain or gift, we need not lay down so much faith.¹⁰ Nor do I mean to assert or defend of anyone canonized that he is not part of the church triumphant; but I doubt with a certain misgiving, if I believe this, since I know that it is possible; and, if this is true, I believe implicitly what I am ignorant of; nor do I wish to contend wantonly to prove of anyone short of Christ that he is blessed, although of many I believe this without misgiving.¹¹ Nor do miracles now current give true faith to all, since power can be committed to the devil, in punishment of the sin of an adulterous generation that seeks signs and lets go the necessary faith in imperceptibleinsensibilis: imperceptible; of a thing that cannot feel, without sensation things, so that by their portents they may in antichristian fashion lead very many into error (of whose marks it was said in the sixth book, sixth chapter).¹² And a miracle is commonly called, now, materially, any work done by God miraculously; and so many are drawn to deduce ill-sounding conclusions, since every creature seems in this way to be a miracle as regards God. But formally a miracle is taken for an operation proper to God, wonderful to the creature; and so the blessed do not work miracles, although they are sometimes the occasion, so that God at the instance of their prayers or merit works a miracle. And then they are said to work such a miracle sub-authentically, or ministerially, as they commonly are.¹³ And that discernment of a miracle is hidden from them, except those to whom God has willed to reveal it. And would that so many ceremonies and signs were not multiplied in our church, since the deeds of the saints and all other rites are not praiseworthy except in so far as they raise the mind to 46love the lord Jesus Christ. And it seems to many that an indistinct faith about the prayer of the saints would gather the faith of Christ in worshippers of ChristChristicole: worshippers of Christ more singly, and consequently more intently, more securely and better, than so great an explicit multiplicity of saints brought in from day to day.¹⁴ For in this way we know indistinctly of anyone blessed or damned, foreknownprescitus, -i: the foreknown or predestinatepredestinatus, -i: the predestinate (sg. "a predestinate [person]"), that he is such; with which indistinct knowledge a particular doubt is compatible, and ignorance [is compatible] with distinct knowledge of the general. So from such manifold canonization, beyond the rite of the old testament and of our primitive church, there is in part profit and in part harm; and it is likely to many that it harms more, since the multitude of rites, taking away the freedom of the church, is the cause of many errors. And every such saint would pray for us more effectually, supposing that, his cult set aside, we loved our Jesus more. For there are many saints unknown to us, more blessed than the canonized, who profit us more by praying than the said saints whose feasts we keep with particular devotion; since the prayer of the saints, who love more those who love their God more, profits according to the worthiness of the almsmanelemosinarius: almsman.¹⁵

There is also another evil of the church: that our superiors

more require that credence be given to their approvals and reprobations in all their judgments than they require that credence be given to the faith of holy scripture, which is the catholic faith;¹⁶ and they persecute more for the fulfilment of their traditions, punishing those who contravene them more harshly, than they do against those who blaspheme against the chief faith of Christ; so that of them can be said that word of Psalm 40:10: "Who ate my bread, hath greatly supplanted me."¹⁷ For the pleasure-loving president, under the cloak of the church’s peace, seeks the goods of the poor, which are by antonomasiaautonomatice / antonomastice: by antonomasia (pre-eminently) 47the bread of Christ; and he magnifies, like a Pharisee, his own traditions, by which he tyrannically despoils the people, to whom he says by word and deed that they are equal to or surpass the law of God. And this is in effect the supplanting of the law of Christ, etc.¹⁸