Question — Bontempi, Palladium Theologicum V · from Schola Thomistica
Question VIII: Whether, having heard Mass only, it is forbidden to spend the whole feast day in idleness
They ASSERT that it is not, Alens. 3. part. quaest. 32. m. 5. art. 2. ad 4. Sotus in 3. d. 27. §. Quantum ad 2. Angel. V. feriae, num. 36. and V. Interrogationis, num. 6. and V. Praeceptum, num. 5. Rosella V. Confessio, 2. num. 7. D. Antonin. 2. part. tit. 9. cap. 7. §. 3. and 2. part. in 13. cap. 1. §. 1. Lyra Exodi 20. and it seems to D. Thomas 2. 2. quaest. 122. art. 4. ad 3. and D. Bonavent. 12. 3. d. 37. dub. 3. litt. et serm. 4. in Decal. thus it is reported by Fagundez on the first precept of the Church, cap. 4. num. 29. but already in quaest. 3. I explained the meaning of D. Bonaventure.
An audito tantum SACRO tota die Festi otiari sit vetitum.
ASSERUNT Alens. 3. part. quaest. 32. m. 5. art. 2. ad 4. Sotus in 3. d. 27. §. Quantum ad 2. Angel. V. feriae, num. 36. et V. Interrogationis, num. 6. et V. Praeceptum, num. 5. Rosella V. Confessio, 2. num. 7. D. Antonin. 2. part. tit. 9. cap. 7. §. 3. et 2. part. in 13. cap. 1. §. 1. Lyra Exodi 20. et videtur D. Thomae 2. 2. quaest. 122. art. 4. ad 3. et D. Bonavent. 12. 3. d. 37. dub. 3. litt. et serm. 4. in Decal. sic refertur a Fagundez in primum praecept. Eccl. cap. 4. num. 29. sed iam quaest. 3. sensum D. Bonavent. explicui.
To the NEGATIVE opinion have followed all those who in quaest. 3. deny that it is a special sin, not only to rest, but even to commit mortal sins.
NEGATIVAM sententiam secuti sunt quotquot quaest. 3. negant, esse speciale peccatum, nedum otiari, sed lethalia patrare.
I judge this opinion the more probable, which seems to me more according to the mind of our Holy Doctor. Fagundez refers to them again in cap. 14. num. 30.
PROBABILIOREM iudico hanc sententiam, quae videtur magis mihi ad mentem S. Doctoris nostri. Eos refert iterum Fagundez cap. 14. num. 30.
It is PROVED, because the precept of feasts only enjoins rest from servile works, and the hearing of Mass: Therefore it obliges to nothing else, even if the intention of the lawgiver directs to the end of keeping holiday for God. The consequence is proved, because the law is not violated even if the end of the lawgiver is not attained, provided the substance of the law be kept, as D. Thomas teaches, prima secundae, quaest. 100. art. 9. ad 2.
PROBATUR, quia festorum praeceptum solum iniungit vacationem a servilibus, et auditionem Missae : Ergo ad nihil aliud obligat, etiamsi intentio legislatoris dirigat ad finem vacandi Deo. Probatur consequentia, quia in legem non impingitur, etiamsi finis legislatoris non attingatur, dummodo substantia legis servetur, ut docet D. Thom. prima secundae, quaest. 100. art. 9. ad 2.
The ARGUMENTS on either side were examined in question 3.
ARGUMENTA hinc inde examinata sunt quaestione 3.
Concerning the Precept of hearing the holy Sacrifice, I shall defer it to the 3. part, Treatise on Mass, disp. 12.
DE Praecepto audiendi sacrum, differam 3. parte Tractatu de Missa, disp. 12.