Mendoza: Mary may receive latria by contact with Christ—secondary and respective, if scandal is avoided (Cajetan on Thomas)
School baseline: Saints get dulia, Mary hyperdulia—yet Mendoza asks if she may also take latria.
Three dignities: holiness (dulia), maternity (hyperdulia), contact with Christ (latria), as cross and nails do.
Cajetan’s Thomas: allowed as secondary respective latria if scandal is kept off—so Mendoza concludes.
Latin
XXXVII. Caeterum quamvis Doctores Ecclesiae Romanae adorationem qua Sancti coluntur, non ad Latriam, verum ad Duliam pertinere doceant, quam vero Beatae Virgini deferunt, ad Hyperduliam; nihilominus nonnulli eorum in quaestionem vocant, an non etiam Latria Virgo Maria possit adorari? Et ad quaestionem illam affirmative Respondent. Id praesertim videre est apud Franciscum Mendoza Jesuitam. Proposita enim ista quaestione, Utrum Beata Virgo adoratione Latriae adorari queat? Ad eam solvendam notat tria dignitatis genera in Virgine observari posse. Prima dignitas consistit in illius sanctitate, ob quam adoratione Duliae colendam esse dicit. Secunda in eo quod est mater Dei, propter quam Hyperduliae cultu adorandam esse statuit. Tertia in eo quod tetigit Christum Dominum nostrum, ratione cujus existimat Virginem adoratione Latriae coli posse. Sicut, ex sententia Thomae, crux, & clavi, aliaque quae Christi corpus tetigerunt, Latriae cultu colenda sunt. Postquam enim sibi multa in contrarium opposuit, quaestionem sic tandem concludit, Nihilominus dicendum est posse Beatam Virginem ratione solius contactus adorari adoratione Latriae. Neque divus Thomas absolute hoc negat, sed quando est scandalum aut periculum Idololatriae, ut ejus interpres Cajetanus exponit. Quare si quis idoneus sit ad discernendas rationes adorationis, & cavendum omne scandalum, poterat Beatam Virginem ratione contactus adorare adoratione Latriae: quamvis enim haec adoratio Latriae non sit primaria & absoluta, est tamen secundaria & respectiva, ab uno eodemque habitu Religionis proficiscens. In Virid. lib. 2. de Floribus sacris problem. 4. Ut refertur apud Carolum Drelincurtium de honore Beatae Virgini debito Tom. 1. pag. 355.
About this text
Louis Le Blanc de Beaulieu, Sedan Theses, newly rendered from Latin: from theology proper through the Roman theses I–77 and the Reformed theses of Part Two. The theses only — not the collected works.
English follows locked Pitt Latin through Imaginum CLOSED + Sanctorum Cultu Romana CLOSED + Pars Secunda Reformata I-XL. 1675 PDF ~384-390 (book ~370-376); Vision OCR + pdftotext + tess. No modern English. This slice densifies Sanctorum Pars Secunda I-XL. Next: Pars Secunda XLI–fin (~CI). Claim stays claimed (book densify not done).
Catalogue & scope
ESTC R17887; Wing L802. IA bub_gb_eOkHAW4G0-wC (+ EEBO 1675 for gap leaves). Densify through Sanctorum Cultu Romana I-LXXVII + Pars Secunda Reformata I-XL (Pars Secunda not closed; not whole folio).
Witnesses
- Copy-text Locked Latin, De Theologia I-XLIII (Pitt 1675) (Latin)
- Checked print Internet Archive PDF of the 1675 Pitt folio (Latin)
- Checked print pdftotext of De Theologia pages (Latin)
- Checked print Internet Archive DjVu OCR of the 1675 Pitt folio (Latin)
- Copy-text Locked Latin, De Fide I-XXII (Pitt 1675) (Latin)
- Copy-text Locked Latin, De Authoritate Scripturae Pars I I-XLVII + Pars II I-XXXV + Pars III I-VIII (Pitt 1675) (Latin)
- Copy-text Locked Latin, De Scripturae plenitudine densify (Pitt 1675) (Latin)
This is an AI-assisted study translation. Source fidelity and completeness have not been independently certified. Open Latin on each section (or the Latin source witness link) for the source text. This is not a complete critical edition.