Now (which is to be observed, as that which unveils the whole mystery) they hold, that any one of these is sufficient; not only the third, or the second, but even the first, though it be the worst, and of least importance. So (f)Angelus, (g)Sylvester, (h)Cajetane, (i)Bellarmine, (k)Tolet. So (l)Aquinas, Soto, Navarre, so all of them, it is (they tell us) (m)the common Doctrine Universally received ⟨p. 13⟩And this clears all, and leads us directly through their reserves and concealments, and the ambiguity of their expressions (apt to mislead an unwary eye, and abuse a charitable mind, loth to think them so bad, as they speak themselves) into the open view of their irreligious (not to say Atheistical) Doctrine. This makes it very evident, that, with them it is not needful, either to worship God, or intend it. For since they agree, that any one of the several sorts of Attention is sufficient; the first, which concerns the bare words, is enough in their account; and the other are needless. It is not requisite that they should mind, either the things to be prayed for, or the God they should pray to, or the sense of the words they pronounce; it will suffice that they mind the words to them senseless, and therein the empty and insignificant figure and sound. Now words without sense are in themselves neither good nor bad; no worship, sure, can be imagined in them, they are no better, (but less tolerable) in the mouths of men, than the sound of Bruits. And the mere figure and sound of Letters, can make men no more worshippers, than Conjurers; yet such is all the worshipping or praying that they count necessary. But if they had a mind to Supererogate, and their Catholics were to do more than their Duty, i. e. Act as becomes Men in their service, taking the sense along with the words: yet the third sort of Attention, which concerns God, is still unnecessary, there need be no application of the mind unto God in their prayers; Surely in any Religion, but that which will have men abandon both Sense and Reason in matters plain and obvious to either; God would not be thought to be worshipped, when he is not at all minded. By their common Doctrine now mentioned (wherein all sorts of their Authors conspire) first their minds, may in their Divine service, not only depart from God by natural, or inadvertent vagaries, but they may dismiss them from God on set purpose.
Now (which is to be observed, as that which unvails the whole mystery) they hold, that any one of these is sufficient; not only the third, or the second, but even the first, though it be the worst, and of least importance. So (f)Angelus, (g)Silvester, (h)Cajetane, (i)Bellarmine, (k)Tolet. So (l)Aquinas, Soto, Navar, so all of them, it is (they tell us) (m)the common Doctrine Ʋniversally received ⟨p. 13⟩And this clears all, and leads us directly through their reserves and concealments, and the ambiguity of their expressions (apt to mislead an unwary eye, and abuse a charitable mind, loth to think them so bad, as they speak themselves) into the open view of their irreligious (not to say Atheistical) Doctrine. This makes it very evident, that, with them it is not needful, either to worship God, or intend it. For since they agree, that any one of the several sorts of Attention is sufficient; the first, which concerns the bare words, is enough in their account; and the other are needless. It is not requisite that they should mind, either the things to be prayed for, or the God they should pray to, or the sense of the words they pronounce; it will suffice that they mind the words to them senseless, and therein the empty and insignificant figure and sound. Now words without sense are in themselves neither good nor bad; no worship, sure, can be imagined in them, they are no better, (but less tolerable) in the mouths of men, than the sound of Bruits. And the mere figure and sound of Letters, can make men no more worshippers, than Conjurers; yet such is all the worshipping or praying that they count necessary. But if they had a mind to Supererogate, and their Catholicks were to do more than their Duty, i. e. Act as becomes Men in their service, taking the sense along with the words: yet the third sort of Attention, which concerns God, is still unnecessary, there need be no application of the mind unto God in their prayers; Surely in any Religion, but that which will have men abandon both Sense and Reason in matters plain and obvious to either; God would not be thought to be worshipped, when he is not at all minded. By their common Doctrine now mentioned (wherein all sorts of their Authours conspire) first their minds, may in their Divine service, not only depart from God by natural, or inadvertent vagaries, but they may dismiss them from God on set purpose.
- (f)Quocunque istorum modorum adsit intentio, non est inefficax oratio ad satisfaciendum. Et ego dico nec ad impetrandum vel reficiendum. Sum. Angel. v. oratio. n. 11.
- (g)Quaecunque harum adsit, oratio non est censenda inattenta Sylvest. sum. v. orat. n. 6.
- (h)Una istarum attentionum sufficit. Cajetan. sum. ibid.
- (i)Quaelibet vero harum trium sufficit Bellarm. de bon. Operib. l. 1. c. 18. p. 1026. Edit. Lugd. An. 1599.
- (k)Secunda attentio non est necessaria—Tertia etiam attentio non est necessaria. Tolet. In struct. l. 2. cap. 13. p. 449.
- (l)Consequenter D. Thomas, Cajetan, Soto, & saepe Navarre. asserunt, quamcunque ex dictis attentionibus sufficere ad probitatem Orationis & implendum praeceptum Suar. de Orat. vocal. l. 3. c. 4. n. 18.Consequenter D. Thomas, Cajetan, Soto, & saepe Navar. asserunt, quamcunque ex dictis attentionibus sufficere ad probitatem Orationis & implendum praeceptum Suar. de Orat. vocal. l. 3. c. 4. n. 18.
- (m)Communis est, quia Omnes dicunt minimam attentionem sufficere. Idem ibid. n.
