for in other things, it is not so much as under Counsel, to follow the safest. Accordingly Metina (in (y)Lopez) says, the opinion of expert Divines, may be held without sin, although the contrary be more clear, and more safe. In short, that an opinion which is less probable, may be followed; is asserted (we are told) both by the greater part, and the graver sort of their Divines. ⟨p. 382⟩(z)above Forty of their grave Doctors are alleged for it, and amongst them, Martin Navarre, Medina, Peter Navarre, Aragon, Bannes, Du Vallius, with others, besides Jesuits. A• present take only the words of Navarre, who speaks fully. (a)In the Court of Conscience (says he) it is enough for the avoiding of sin, to take his opinion for true, whom we probably think, to be a man of sufficient knowledge, and Conscience; and quotes their Gloss and Panormitan for it. To whom let me add Sancta Clara, who, not only tells us (as we have heard before (b)that at this day it seems to be the common opinion of their Schools and Doctors; that the people erring with their Teacher, or Pastor, are wholly excused from all fault: but also, when any has a probable ground for what he does: (c)as when a Country-man believes any thing to be lawful, induced thereto, by the testimony of the Parish-Priest, or of his Parents: although he mistake, yet his mistake is void of sin; according to the rule in Law, just and probable ignorance ought to be excused. So that to make a sin to be no sin, not only the judgment of a grave Doctor so determining, but of a Parish-Priest (who are known to be sufficiently ignorant); yea of Parents also (more ignorant than they) will suffice, and herein (says he) the Doctors generally ⟨p. 383⟩concur. In fine, if it be the common opinion, that invincible (as Divines) or probable ignorance (as the Canonists call it), is excused from all sin: and that it is an instance hereof, (d)when one is mislead by a sufficient Author; then this is the common Doctrine of the Romanists, and not the extravagancy of some particular Sect, or Order amongst them.
for in other things, it is not so much as under Counsel, to follow the safest. Accordingly Metina (in (y)Lopez) sayes, the opinion of expert Divines, may be held without sin, although the contrary be more clear, and more safe. In short, that an opinion which is less probable, may be followed; is asserted (we are told) both by the greater part, and the graver sort of their Divines. ⟨p. 382⟩(z)above Forty of their grave Doctors are alledged for it, and amongst them, Martin Navar, Medina, Peter Navar, Arragon, Bannes, Du Vallius, with others, besides Jesuits. A• present take only the words of Navar, who speaks fully. (a)In the Court of Conscience (says he) it is enough for the avoiding of sin, to take his opinion for true, whom we probably think, to be a man of sufficient knowledg, and Conscience; and quotes their Glosse and Panormitan for it. To whom let me add Sancta Clara, who, not only tells us (as we have heard before (b)that at this day it seems to be the common opinion of their Schools and Doctors; that the people erring with their Teacher, or Pastor, are wholly excused from all fault: but also, when any has a probable ground for what he does: (c)as when a Countrey-man believes any thing to be lawful, induced thereto, by the testimony of the Parish-Priest, or of his Parents: although he mistake, yet his mistake is void of sin; according to the rule in Law, just and probable ignorance ought to be excused. So that to make a sin to be no sin, not only the judgment of a grave Doctor so determining, but of a Parish-Priest (who are known to be sufficiently ignorant); yea of Parents also (more ignorant than they) will suffice, and herein (says he) the Doctors generally ⟨p. 383⟩concur. In fine, if it be the common opinion, that invincible (as Divines) or probable ignorance (as the Canonists call it), is excused from all sin: and that it is an instance hereof, (d)when one is mislead by a sufficient Authour; then this is the common Doctrine of the Romanists, and not the extravagancy of some particular Sect, or Order amongst them.
- (y)Dicit opinionem posse teneri sine peccato, quae est peritorum virorum, licet contrarium si• planius & securius. cap. 52. p. 271.
- (z)Licitum esse sectari opinionem minus probabilem, relicta probabiliori, docent Mercado, Medina, Sairus, (naming 20 besides, and adding, & alij plures) Jo. Sauc. disp 42. n. 12. Possumus ubsque peccato sequi opinionem probabilem, relicta probabiliore, & tutiare. Bonacin. Tom. 2. disp. 2. q. 4. punc. 9. n. 4. Clavis Regia, & alij communiter. ibid. n. 5. For this Barnabas Gallego a Dominican produces near Fifty of their Doctors, many of them of the same order, and says it is sententia communior inter Thomistas. tract. de conscient. dubi. de consc. probabili. So that if we may trust those whom who we see no reason to think partial to the Society, this is not a singular conceit of the Jesuits; but the opinion of their other Divines generally, and the more common Doctine of Aquinas his Disciples, otherwise most opposite to the Society.
- (a)In foro tamen conscientiae ad effectum non peccandi sufficit eligere pro vera ejus opinionem, quem merito censemus esse virum idonea & scientia & conscientia praeditum. cap. 27. n. 288.
- (b)Deus. nat. gr. probl. 15. p. 99. supra.
- (c)Probabilis est quando quis habet fundamentum probabile; ut dum rusticus credit aliquid esse licitum, ductus testimonio sui parochi vel parentun:—tunc iste (licet contra veritatem erret) nulla culpa errat: sic Doctores communiter, secundum illud: ignorantia justa & probabilis excusare debet. ibid. p. 78.
- (d)Durandus—.cum excuset probabilis ignorantia, puta, si habet aliquem Doctorem authenticum & famosum, cujus opinioni n•titur in Sylvest. v. confess. n. 2. Vervec. dubitans & consulens viros Doctos falso consul•n•s, laborat ignorantia invincibili. ibid. v. Ignor. n. 5. Justa ignorantia—qualis est, cum quis petit consilium a viris habitis pro praeditis scientia & conscientia in id sufficienti, qui falso ei consulunt, & haec omnino excuset. Navarre. c. 23. n. 46. Graft. l. 2. c. 131. n. 2•. & l. 4. c. 9. n. 8. Sancta Clara. ibid. p. 96. Herrera & Faber. ibi. •onacina. de peccat. d. 2. q. 8. p. 2 n. 9. & 16.
