Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Church Triumphant, Book III: On Churches, Vows, Pilgrimages and Feasts
Chapter 6: On the Adornment of Churches
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. II, De Ecclesia quae Triumphat in Coelis, the fourth general controversy. The Latin source text is public domain; this English rendering is released with the site. Scripture quotations follow Bellarmine's Vulgate citations, rendered in Douay-Rheims wording where he quotes exactly. Click “Show the Latin” for the original (raw OCR of the scan; scanning errors remain — the scan itself is the authority).
The adornment of churches consists partly in the building itself, partly in images, crosses, chalices, vestments and other adornments of that kind. This adornment is found fault with both by the old Petrobrusians and Wycliffites and by the Lutherans and Calvinists, in the places noted at the beginning. Their arguments are these.
First, from Jeremias 7: “Trust not in lying words, saying: The temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord.” On which place Jerome writes thus: “He commanded both the people of the Jews then, and us today who seem to be set in the Church, not to have confidence in the splendour of buildings, and gilded ceilings, and walls clothed with slabs of marble, and to say, The temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord.”
Second, from Jerome in the letter to Nepotian: “Many build walls and set up the columns of the church; the marbles gleam, the ceilings shine with gold, the altar is picked out with jewels.” And below: “Nor let anyone set against me the rich temple in Judaea, the table, lamps, censers, dishes, cups, little mortars and the rest, wrought of gold. These were approved by the Lord then, when the priests offered victims, and the blood of beasts was the redemption of sins; but now, since the poor Lord has dedicated the poverty of his house, let us think of his cross, and we shall count riches as mud.” And below: “Either let us reject gold with the other superstitions of the Jews, or if gold pleases, let the Jews please too,” and so on.
Third, from Ambrose, book 2 On Offices, chapter 28: “It would have been better,” he says, “to keep vessels of the living than of metals. To these no answer could be given. For what would you say? I feared lest adornment should be lacking to the temple of God? He would answer: Sacraments do not seek gold, nor are those things pleasing in gold which are not bought with gold; the adornment of the sacraments is the redemption of captives.”
Fourth, from Acacius, of whom Socrates reports, book 7, chapter 21, that when he was accused of having sold the sacred vessels for the poor, he answered: “Our God needs neither dishes nor cups, because he neither eats nor drinks.”
Fifth, from Hilary in the letter against Auxentius: “Wrongly,” he says, “has love of walls seized you; wrongly do you venerate the Church of God in roofs and buildings.”
Sixth, from Lactantius, who, book 2, chapter 4, praises Persius for writing that golden vessels ought not to be brought into temples: “Excellently,” he says, “and wisely he thought.”
Seventh, from Bernard, in the Apology to Abbot William, near the end: “O vanity of vanities, but no more vain than mad! The Church shines in her walls and lacks in her poor; she clothes her stones with gold and leaves her sons naked.”
Eighth, from Chrysostom, who in homilies [51?] and [81?] on Matthew teaches that it is better to give alms than to adorn a church, and refutes the argument which is wont to be made for us.
To these they add reasons. The first reason is that Christ always loved and taught poverty.
The second, that gold in churches is idle and superfluous; for neither do the walls themselves feel that adornment, nor do they need it for the end for which they were built. Hence Persius:
Tell me, you priests, what is gold doing in a holy place?
The third, that that splendour of churches not only does not help, but even harms; for it calls the mind away and distracts it from spiritual thoughts.
The fourth, that it is better to adorn living temples than dead ones; and there are never lacking poor men, who are living temples, and who need not only adornment but even the necessary support of life.
The fifth, that at the judgement he will not be condemned who has not adorned a church with gold and silver, but he who has not fed Christ in the poor man. These, then, are their arguments; which, though they seem to have great force, yet can do nothing against the truth; for nothing is more powerful than the truth. And the answers to these arguments will be brought in this same chapter, after the opinion of the Church has been explained and confirmed.
Let the first proposition, then, be: To build or adorn the churches of God at great cost is a good and godly work of its kind. It is proved, first, from the Old Testament. For God willed the tabernacle to be most richly adorned, so that almost all the instruments of the sanctuary were of gold, even to the snuffers of the lamps. And he willed the curtains of the tabernacle and the vestments of the priest to be most precious, of silk, fine linen, purple, gems and so on; and that craftsmen might not be lacking, he gave to certain men wisdom and skill for making all those things. See Exodus 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 35, 36, 37, 38 and 39. Then in Numbers 7 each of the princes offered for the adornment of the tabernacle immense gifts of gold and silver. David prepared for the cost of the temple so much gold, silver and precious stones as to seem incredible; read 1 Paralipomenon, the last chapter and the one before it, and book 2, chapters 3, 4 and 5. But surely the reasons which are made against the adornment of our churches, if they had any force, would also fight against the tabernacle of Moses and the temple of Solomon. For then too very many poor were not lacking; then too the walls did not feel their adornment; then too it could distract the minds of those praying; and yet not for that reason was the most magnificent building of the temple and tabernacle given up.
Second, from the New Testament. For in the first place, Mark 12, Christ praised the widow who put into the treasury of the temple two mites, that is, her whole living. If then that widow did rightly in spending her whole living on the gifts of God, how can those be blamed who give at least part of their goods to adorn the house of God? Likewise in chapter 13, when the apostles said, “Master, behold what manner of stones and what buildings are here,” the Lord had an excellent occasion of finding fault with that magnificence of the temple, or at least of instructing his disciples by saying that it was lawful in the Old Testament to adorn temples, but that it would not be lawful in the law of the Gospel. But the Lord said nothing of the kind. Likewise in chapter 14, when Judas took it ill that Magdalen should go to such cost in anointing the Lord's head, and said, “Why was this waste of the ointment made? For this ointment might have been sold for more than three hundred pence, and given to the poor,” the Lord answered, “She hath wrought a good work upon me.” But if it was lawful, passing over the poor, to anoint the Lord's head at such cost, why should it not be lawful also to build at great cost a house for the Lord himself?
Third, it is proved from the prophecy of Isaias. For in chapter 60, where the chief expositors admit that the Christian Church existing on earth is treated to the letter, we read thus: “And I will glorify the house of my majesty.” And below: “For the islands wait for me, that I may bring thy sons from afar, their silver and their gold with them, to the name of the Lord thy God.” And below: “And the children of strangers shall build up thy walls, and their kings shall minister to thee.” And below: “The glory of Libanus shall come to thee, the fir tree, and the box tree, and the pine tree together, to beautify the place of my sanctuary: and I will glorify the place of my feet.” Which prophecy was fulfilled to the letter in the time of Constantine and other princes, who built and adorned most magnificent churches.
Fourth, it is proved from the Fathers. Eusebius, book 9 [10?] of the History, chapter [2?]: “From which,” he says, “there was present to all a gladness poured in as by a divine gift, especially when they saw those places which a little before had been destroyed by the wicked devices of the tyrants rising again, by a renewed building, brighter and loftier, and lofty churches raised in place of lowly meeting places.”
Cyril, catechesis 14: “Those who now are kings,” he says, “for piety's sake, clothing with silver and gold this holy Church of the Resurrection, in which we now are, have built it, and made it glorious with silver and golden adornments.”
Athanasius, in the Apology to Constantius, does not blame, but praises, the zeal of Constantius for building at Alexandria at his own cost a church of such greatness that a whole people could be held in it, which others could not hold. [The top of page 531 is merged across columns in the scan; this sentence is rendered from what reads.]
Gregory Nazianzen, oration 1 against Julian, when he had said that a basilica was begun by Gallus and Julian at great cost to the holy martyr Mamas, adds that the work of Gallus was accepted by God like the sacrifice of Abel.
Gregory of Nyssa, in the oration on Theodore, says that the church of St. Theodore was most magnificent and most richly adorned with pictures and carvings, and that this belonged greatly to the glory of the saint; where he openly praises the use of raising magnificent churches.
John Chrysostom, homily 66 to the people of Antioch: “The tomb,” he says, “of the servant of the Crucified is brighter than royal courts, not in greatness and beauty of buildings (though in this too they surpass), but in what is much greater, the zeal of those who come together.” Likewise homily [51?] on Matthew: “Nor do we forbid,” he says, “that a magnificent church be founded,” and so on.
Cyril, at the beginning of the book On the Right Faith, to the queens: “You fittingly,” he says, “give your works, that the things which are pleasing to Christ you both feel and do: partly shining openly with an irreproachable faith, and adorning yourselves and the royal courts with the glory of virginity; partly raising most costly churches to Christ; for this too has been granted you by him, together with your souls.”
Theophylact, on chapter 14 of Mark: “Let those be confounded,” he says, “in this place who prefer the poor to Christ.” And below: “Let them hear, then, how Christ preferred the care of himself to the poor. And the body of Christ properly is that which is on the golden dish, and the blood which is in the cup. He then who takes away the precious dish, and forces the body of Christ to be put in a meaner one, making the poor his pretext, let him know whose side he is on.”
Now from the Latins. Optatus, book 6, testifies that in his time the Church had precious vessels of the sacraments, which the Donatists, plundering them, melted down and sold.
Ambrose, book 2 On Offices, chapter 21: “And it befits a priest most of all,” he says, “to adorn the temple of God with fitting beauty, that by this cult too the court of the Lord may shine.”
Jerome, in the letter to Demetrias, after he had said, “Let others build churches, clothe the walls with slabs of marble,” and so on, adds: “I do not find fault, I do not refuse; but you have another purpose,” and so on. And on chapter 8 of Zacharias he reports to the glory of the Church and the praise of princes that, whereas some heathen emperors overthrew churches, others again built and raised up basilicas, adorned the highest roofs and ceilings and coverings with gold, and clothed the walls with slabs of different marble.
Augustine, on Psalm 113: “But we too,” he says, “have very many instruments and vessels of gold and silver for the use of celebrating the sacraments, which, consecrated by that very ministry, are called holy.”
Prudentius, in the hymn on St. Lawrence, bringing in the tyrant speaking:
This is your custom, this your practice,
this the discipline of your rite,
that the high priests offer libations
with golden cups…
that in silver vessels the sacred blood smokes,
that at your night rites waxen tapers stand fixed in gold. [The verses are partly damaged in the scan.]
Paulinus, in the third birthday poem of St. Felix:
Now the golden thresholds are adorned with snowy veils, and so on.
Prosper, in the book On the Promises and Predictions, part 3, chapter 38, says that in his time a very great church was consecrated to the true God, whose greatness and excellence was such that it even had a court which led to it, of almost a thousand paces in length, all adorned with precious pavement and columns and walls.
Fifth, it is proved from the godliness of those who built churches. For the chief were four: Constantine, Justinian, Charles the Great and Charles IV. Of the churches of Constantine see Damasus in the Life of Sylvester, and Eusebius, books 3 and 4 of the Life of Constantine. Of the churches raised by Justinian see Procopius in the book On the Buildings of Justinian. Of the churches of Charles the Great see the Abbot of Ursperg in the Chronicle. Of the churches of Charles IV see John Cochlaeus at the beginning of book 1 of the History of the Hussites. And it is certain that Constantine was a holy emperor; for in the calendar of the Greeks his name is had among the names of the saints; and by Ambrose, in the oration on the death of Theodosius, by Epiphanius, heresy 70, which is of the Audians, by Cyril, catechesis 14, and by other Fathers again and again he is called holy and blessed.
Likewise Charles the Great is honoured as a saint, especially at Paris and at Aachen, and is praised wonderfully by all the historians. Justinian, except for the heresy into which he fell in his last age, was a most praiseworthy prince. And that Charles IV was most excellent and most religious is plain from what Cochlaeus brings in the place noted. Most holy pontiffs too, Julius, Damasus, Leo, Symmachus and others, who both flourished more than a thousand years ago and were held truly holy by the consent of all writers, built and adorned many basilicas. And it is not credible that so many godly princes, both churchmen and statesmen, could have agreed in works of this kind if they did not please God.
It is proved lastly by reasons. The first reason, from the greatness of God. For the greater the prince for whom a house is built, the greater it ought to be. And who is greater than God? Wherefore Solomon, book 2 of Paralipomenon, chapter 2: “For the house which I desire to build, is great: for our God is great above all gods.”
The second reason, from the very kind of the work. For to build a splendid church to God is of its kind an act of two excellent virtues, religion and magnificence; and so good of its kind.
The third reason, because it is not only an act of those virtues, but also an exercise and sign of others. For he who raises a magnificent church gives a magnificent testimony of his faith and charity toward God, and also of his piety and gratitude; and because money is wont to be loved exceedingly, he who spends it freely for the honour of God shows that he truly loves God above all things.
The fourth reason, from usefulness. For a church magnificently adorned has many uses. For first it draws men more easily to the godly things which are done in churches; for dark and dirty places are not gladly frequented. Then it keeps the majesty of the sacraments and the reverence which is owed to divine things; for when we see a splendid and adorned altar we easily lift up our mind and think that God is great to whom such things are shown; and on the contrary what is set forth without array is easily despised. Third, piety and devotion are helped, especially of the simple, whose number is the greatest. There is added also a bodily usefulness, that magnificent churches last longer, and are a great glory to the city. The multitude too of golden and silver vessels has often been the salvation of the whole commonwealth, when in a common captivity, famine or plague the treasure of the Church has brought help to many thousands of the wretched, so that it seemed as if given and kept by God for that time.
The fifth reason, from the contrary. Those who laid waste or plundered churches have always been held sacrilegious and lost men, and often even punished by God, as is plain of Baltassar, Daniel 5; of Heliodorus, 2 Machabees 3; of Antiochus, 2 Machabees 9. St. John Chrysostom also writes, homily 4 on Matthew, that at the time when Julian the apostate ordered the adornments of churches, and especially the sacred vessels, to be plundered, at once the royal treasurer burst asunder in the middle and died, and Julian's uncle perished eaten by worms. Cedrenus and Zonaras also write that Leo, the son of Constantine Copronymus, when he had taken from a church a notable crown which the Emperor Maurice had given to adorn the church, at once felt burning boils on his head, and from that, a most burning fever being caught, perished.
The second proposition: To build or adorn churches, though it is a godly and good work, can yet easily be made faulty by a lack of circumstances. It is proved; for there are four chief circumstances from the lack of which it will be evil to adorn churches, namely time, place, manner and person. For in the first place, when someone is bound to help his neighbour, and especially his parents or children, and cannot at once provide for his neighbour and give to the church, then he does not do rightly if, neglecting parents or neighbours, he builds churches. For the Lord says, Osee 6, “I desired mercy, and not sacrifice.” And in Mark 7 the Pharisees are rebuked, who taught sons of families to offer gifts to the temple to the harm of their parents. The same is plain from Paul to the Romans 3, who teaches that evil is not to be done that good may come. Lastly from the practice of the saints, who in a time of great need of the poor melted down chalices and sold them, as is plain from Ambrose, book 2 On Offices, chapter 28. For if in a time of need pastors rightly take adornments away from the church, surely much more rightly are those things not given to the church which would have to be taken away if they had been given.
Nor does the deed of the widow stand in the way, who gave her whole living to the gifts of God. For she did not give the living of her father or of her children, but her own; and her own not for many days, but for one only; for she could not be sustained long by two mites.
Then as regards place, it is certain that not all places require equal adornment. For in great cities, to which many flock, there ought to be splendid churches; but in desert places, where only monks live, it does not seem fitting that so much cost be spent on the buildings of churches. And this is what blessed Bernard chiefly finds fault with in the Apology to William, namely that the monks of Cluny wished to have their oratories so great and so adorned that they equalled or surpassed the splendour of the cathedral churches; where too he rightly finds fault that they carved or painted images of the saints on the pavement, and those who had need to spit in their churches were forced to spit in the face of angels or other saints painted on the ground.
As regards manner, there is sin when the adornments of churches are vain, and serve curiosity rather than religion, such as were in the oratories of the Cluniacs which blessed Bernard finds fault with in the Apology to William: “What is that ridiculous monstrosity doing there?” he says. “What are unclean apes doing there? What fierce lions? What monstrous centaurs? What half-men? What spotted tigers? What fighting soldiers? What huntsmen blowing horns? You may see many bodies under one head, and again many heads on one body. Here is seen on a four-footed beast the tail of a serpent, there on a fish the head of a quadruped; there a beast shows a horse in front and drags half a goat behind; here a horned animal carries the hinder part of a horse. So many, in short, and so wonderful a variety of different forms appears everywhere, that one may rather read in the marbles than in the books, and spend the whole day in wondering at these things one by one rather than in meditating on the law of God.”
As regards person, there is sin when someone wishes to adorn churches beyond his state and condition. For if those who profess poverty, and beg their living from others, wished to build a marble church and adorn it with gold and gems, even if perhaps they could do it with alms gathered from here and there, yet it would not befit their profession; for magnificence belongs not to monks but to princes. Wherefore St. Bernard in that Apology rightly rebukes the Cluniacs from this too, that though they were monks, yet they wished to equal kings in cost and magnificence.
It remains for us to answer the arguments set out at the beginning. To that, then, which was objected from Jeremias, “Trust not in lying words, saying: The temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord,” I answer that in that place the Jews are rebuked by the prophet who, trusting in the outward temple, thought that God was with them and that they were loved by God, and that those evils would not come which were foretold by the prophets, because they had with them the temple of God, even if they themselves lived badly, which is to be a living temple. For that rebuke is not against the building, or against the adornment of temples; for all confidence is rebuked in the outward cult of temples, especially when the inward cult is neglected; yet not for that reason are temples not to be built, or not to be adorned for the honour of God and the memory of the saints. And the very testimony of St. Jerome is to be answered in the same way; for he rebukes those who, not caring to be temples of God by living well, think that all is safe for them if they build or adorn an outward temple.
To the second, which is taken from the words of Jerome, that it may be answered fitly some things are to be noted first. Observe, then, first, that Jerome's purpose is to rebuke those who have greater care of the material temple than of the spiritual; that is, who adorn the building wonderfully, and yet do not care whether fit or unfit men are chosen for the sacred ministries. For so Jerome ends his rebuke of the adornment of churches: “Many,” he says, “build walls and set up the columns of the church; the marbles gleam, the ceilings shine with gold, the altar is picked out with jewels; and of the ministers of Christ there is no choice.” So he; which things are most true, and always were.
Note, second, that the adornment of the tabernacle and temple of the Jews was in some way typical and ceremonial. For the tabernacle and the temple with all their furniture were figures of the Christian Church, as is plain from the discourse of James, Acts 15, where they expound of the Church the words of Amos, chapter 9: “After these things I will return, and will rebuild the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and the ruins thereof I will rebuild, and I will set it up.” Likewise from Paul, 1 Corinthians 10: “All these things happened to them in figure.” Lastly the same is plain from that most exact description of the temple which is had in Ezechiel 40 and following, and from what was said to Moses, that he should make all things exactly after the pattern which he had seen on the mountain, Exodus 25. Because then the tabernacle and the temple were figures, it was necessary that they be such as they were, nor could they have anything less or more; because otherwise they would not have represented rightly; as in Scripture too, if one letter is changed, it no longer signifies what it signified before.
And because the figures of the Old Testament are now fulfilled, and the ceremonial law is abrogated, he who now thought such a temple necessary as was that of the Jews would be superstitious, as in this time the Jews are truly superstitious in thinking that it is not lawful to sacrifice except in such a temple as Solomon made. And in this sense Jerome finds fault with the adornments of churches. For although now there are none among Christians who truly think that churches necessarily require that adornment, as the Jews thought, yet while they set the care of the material building before the very choice of ministers and the spiritual building, they seem by their deeds to be in some way akin to the superstition of the Jews. Which blessed Bernard too noted in the Apology to Abbot William: “To me,” he says, “they in a way represent the ancient rite of the Jews.”
Note, third, that the adornment of the tabernacle and temple of the Jews was not only ceremonial and typical, but also moral. For even if no mysteries had been there, yet natural reason itself dictated that the adornment of the house of God ought to be great; and in this way we rightly draw the adornment of the tabernacle and temple of the Jews into an example for our churches. Nor does Jerome ever find fault with this; nay, he says expressly in the letter to Demetrias: “I do not refuse, I do not find fault.”
To the third, from Ambrose (which Calvin brings in the letter prefixed to the Institutes), I say that in the words of Ambrose there are many things against the adversaries, nothing against us. For, first, Ambrose says that the golden vessels of the Church ought not to be broken except in a great need of the poor; the Church, then, at that time had golden vessels. Second, he says that if it is necessary to alienate the vessels of the Church, it must be diligently inquired whether there are not some not yet consecrated; and if such are found, the consecrated vessels are in no way to be touched; therefore then vessels were consecrated with a fixed rite. Third, he says that if it is necessary to sell consecrated vessels, they ought not to be sold whole, but first melted, and then sold in pieces. Which we gladly admit ought to be done; and all these things fight against the heretics of this time, who will have the vessels of the sacraments neither precious nor consecrated with a fixed rite.
What then Ambrose says (sacraments do not seek gold) does not signify that sacraments in no way require gold, but that they do not require it of necessity, although they require it for seemliness when it can be had. And what he adds (nor are those things pleasing in gold which are not bought with gold) does not signify that they displease in gold, or in no way please more in gold than in other matter, but that they do not please chiefly because they are ministered in gold. For if they displeased in gold, or did not please more than in other matter, Ambrose would not have kept those vessels up to that need, but would never have used them.
To the fourth, of Acacius, I say that the words of that bishop have the same sense. For since that church abounded in such golden vessels (as Socrates writes in the same place), and a very great need of redeeming captives had arisen, that holy bishop sold part of the vessels and redeemed captives to the number of five thousand. And those words of his (our God needs neither dishes nor cups, because he neither eats nor drinks) signify that those vessels bring no usefulness to God, but are had in the Church for the honour of God and our usefulness; and so, when an occasion offers in which they can be more useful to us if they are sold, they ought to be sold, because this too will be more pleasing to God and more honourable. For, as Ambrose says, it is very beautiful and honourable to Christ when it can be said: These poor Christ redeemed; or even, the chalice of Christ redeemed captives not only by the blood which it holds but also by the price of its worth; for the chalice redeemed from the enemy those whom the blood redeemed from sin.
To the fifth, from Hilary: the testimony of Hilary is not to the point. For he does not treat of the adornment of a church, but rebukes those who heard a heretical bishop, that is, Auxentius, in the church, because they thought that there alone was the true Church and the true bishop where there was a church sacred to God; and did not consider that churches are often occupied by heretics, and true Catholics often live either in crypts or in deserts.
To the sixth, from Lactantius. Lactantius wished to prove that gifts are foolishly offered by the heathens to idols, that is, to gods that do not feel: “In vain,” he says, “do men honour and adorn the gods with gold, ivory, gems, as though they could take any pleasure from these things. What use are precious gifts to things that feel nothing?” And he proves this from Persius, who indeed writes wisely that golden vessels ought not to be brought into temples, as though gods of wood and marble delighted in them, when they feel nothing; but rather that things should be offered to living gods, as he himself says:
Right and duty well blended in the soul, and the holy recesses
of the mind, and a breast steeped in noble honour.
So the gold of the temple is not found fault with when it has a good use, that is, of stirring up to piety; but is found fault with only when it is so offered to God as though he were bodily and delighted in such things bodily.
To the seventh, from Bernard, I say that Bernard does not find fault simply with the adornment of the church, but with the adornment which the monks of Cluny used in their churches. For, as is gathered from that Apology, St. Bernard finds fault, first, that monks, poor by profession, raised oratories to an immense height, which did not befit their profession. Second, that while they so adorned their churches they confessed themselves fleshly and weak. For the adornment of churches befits most of all those churches to which the people are wont to flock, because simple men need such things. Hence he says in the same place: “And indeed the cause of bishops is one, of monks another. For we know that they, being debtors to the wise and the unwise, stir up the devotion of a fleshly people with bodily adornments, because they cannot with spiritual ones.” Third, he finds fault that they adorned churches for the sake of gain, namely that more might flock to offer. Fourth, that to the wrong of the saints they carved images on the ground. Fifth, that the goods which they had received to be distributed to the poor they spent on those adornments when the poor were in great need. Sixth, that they used vain adornments in churches, which could only feed curiosity, not stir up piety. And all these are rightly found fault with.
To the eighth, from Chrysostom, I say that he does not deny that it is lawful to build and adorn churches magnificently, but only sets the care of the poor before this adornment; the opposite of which Theophylact, Chrysostom's disciple, teaches on chapter 14 of Mark; but they can easily be reconciled. It is to be known, then, that absolutely it is better to honour God in himself than in the poor; for the love of God ought always to be set before the love of neighbour. Yet because God needs nothing, and wills that what we offer him be useful to us, not to himself, therefore God is more honoured, and a thing is more pleasing to him, when what we offer him is more useful to men. Hence, then, when somewhere the churches are well enough provided, and the poor suffer notable want, then it is better to give alms to the poor than to add adornments to the church; and in this case Chrysostom speaks. For he saw men very ready to offer gifts to the Church and negligent in the care of the poor; in which sense Osee too seems to have said, chapter 6, “I desired mercy, and not sacrifice,” that is, I prefer mercy to sacrifice.
But on the contrary, if somewhere the poor are treated moderately well, but the churches are neglected and deserted, and for this reason piety and devotion decline, then it is better to adorn churches, because this is more useful even to the neighbour, whose piety and devotion are helped by that adornment; and in this case Theophylact speaks. And when there is an equal need both of churches and of the poor, provided it is not extreme, it would seem better to give to the church than to the poor man; because spiritual need is to be made more of than temporal, and because the adornment of the church is a more lasting and more common good than alms given to the poor, and because it is given more immediately to God.
To the first reason I say three things. First, that Christ was poor and did not seek for himself any pomp or delights in this world; yet he did not refuse at times costly services by which he saw the devotion of the godly fed and increased; as is plain of his entry into Jerusalem upon an ass, in which he gladly allowed many to spread their garments in the way, which were trodden by the feet of the beast and perhaps even torn, Matthew 21; it is plain also of the most precious ointment with which he allowed his head and feet to be anointed, Matthew 26 and John 12.
Second, I say that Christ was poor, and loved the stable and rags and mean food, for this reason, that these fitted the time of his mortality; for he had come to suffer, and to redeem the world by labours and pains. But now after death and resurrection, since he reigns glorious in heaven, a magnificent and most splendid house befits him.
Add, third, that churches are dedicated to Christ chiefly by reason of his divinity, by which reason he was always rich, the King of kings and Lord of lords. And so those magnificent churches are most rightly built, such as befit God, although the same Christ in the form of a servant taught humility and poverty by word and example.
To the second I say that adornments are not idle which are signs of our reverence and piety toward God, and stir up devotion in the minds of men. Hence to Persius asking,
Tell me, you priests, what is gold doing in a holy place?
it must be answered: It does many good things, which we have already counted up.
To the third I say that those adornments are not made to distract, but to stir up devotion. And if some are distracted, it is the fault of those who misuse good things; unless perhaps the adornments are wholly vain and foolish, which we too find fault with.
To the fourth, of the poor in need, the answer has already been given. Add that if because of the poor churches ought not to be built or adorned, much less ought one to build a palace, set up a banquet, have a great train of horses, servants and so on. If then it is lawful for princes, to keep their dignity, to have magnificent palaces, notwithstanding the multitude of the poor, why is it not lawful also, to keep the majesty of sacred things, to build a church magnificently, notwithstanding the multitude of the poor?
To the fifth I say that in Matthew 25 the works of mercy are counted up, and there we see what is to be thought of the poor. For it is said, “Depart into everlasting fire, for I was hungry, and you gave me not to eat”; and it is not said, depart into everlasting fire because you took other men's goods; but this is gathered from that. So too it is not said, depart into everlasting fire because you did not build a church; but this is gathered by a stronger reason. For if he is condemned who did not give alms when he was bound to give it, much more will he be condemned who did not build, or did not repair, or did not adorn a church when he was bound to do it. But when one is bound and when not is another question, which does nothing to our matter.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT VI.
Dc ornalu lcmplorum.
Onialus tcmplormn partim in ipsa nihrica con>i-
slil. parlim iii imiigimbus, crucibus, culicilius, vc-
slibus.aliisqui; id gcnus ornamentis.Ucprchcndiinl
hunc ornalum. tain vclcres Pclrobrusiani cl \Vi-
(-lclislac, quam cliain Lulhcrani cl Calvinist;ic, lo-
cis iniiio notali^. Argumcnta illorum haec sunl.
Primuni. cx Hierem. 7. iSolile confalere in ver-
bis mcndacii dicenles .templum Domini.lcmpluni
Domini. In quem locum ila scribit llicronymus:
Praecepit, inquit, el tunc populo Juilaeorum, ct
liodic nobis, qui videmur in Ecclesia constituli.
ne jiduciam habeamus iii aedificiorum splendore
auratisque laquearibus.et vestitis parielibus mar-
morum crucis, ct dicamus,tcmplum Domini.tem-
pluin Domini cst.
Sccundum, ex Ilieronymo in cpist. ad Nepolin-
num: Multi aedificant parietes . el columnas ec-
clesiae subslruunt: marmora nilcnt. auro splen-
dent laquearia, (jcmmis cUare dislinguitur. Et
inlVa:.Ye(jKe mihi aliquis opponat divcs inJudaea
templum, mensam, lucernas. Ihuribula. patellas
scijphos, morlariola.ct caelera, ex auro fabrefa-
cta Tunc haec probabaniur a Domino. quando
sacerdoies hostias immolabant, et sanguis pecjt-
dum erat rcdemptio peccatorum: nunc vero cuni
paupertatem domus suae pauper Dominus drdi-
carit, cogitemus crucem ejus. et divitias lulum
pulabimus. Et inlVa: Aul aurumrp.pudiemus ciiin
cacteri^i superstitionibus Judaeorum, aul si aa-
ruin placet, placcant et Judaei elc.
Terliuui, ex Ainbrosio lib. 2. de offici!S,cap.2S.
5r)0
DE CULTU SANCTOIiLM
Mdius fuerat, inqiiit.jff vasa vivenliuni servaTes,
quam metallorum. Jlis nnnpotest responsumre-
1'erri.Quid enini dieeres:^ timni ne templo Dci or-
natus deesset. Resinniderct, aurum sacramenta
non quaerunl, neque auro plaecnt, quae auro
non emnntur, ornalus sacramentorum redem-
ptio captivorum est.
Qii;uiiim. ox Aciicio, de (|iin Sdorales lil).7.c<'ip.
21. rcrert qui cum nccusareUir, quod sacra vasa
vendidisset propler pauperes. respoudit: Deusno-
ster neque discis. ncque calicibus c<jet, quianon
comcdil, neque hibit.
Quiiihim. e.\ Iliiario in episl. coiilra Auxenlium:
Malc, iiiquil , pariclum vos anior cocpit. male
Ecclesiam Dei in leclis , aedillciisque vencra-
mini.
Scxliim, ex Laclanlio. qui lib. 2. cap. 4. laudal
Persium, quod scripseril, noii debere aiirea vasa
lemplis iiirerri: Eqrcgie, inquit, sopientcr sensit.
Seplimum, ex Bernardo, iii ar)oloi,'ia a<i Guliel-
iiiuin abbalein prope liiiem: 0 vanilas vanitatum.
sed non vanior, quam insnnior: fulget Eccelesia
in parietibus,et in pauperibus eqet: suos Lapidcs
induil auro, et suos fiUos nudos dcserit.
Octavum. ex Chrysoslomo: qiii lioniil. 11] . etSI.
in Mallli. docel , melius essc daro eleemosynam,
quam ornare tcmplum. et refellit argumenlum,
i|uod pro nobis fieri solel.
llis addunt raliones. Prima ratio est, quia Chri-
slus semper amavit el docuil pauperlalem.
Secunda.quia otiosum el supervacaiieum estau-
ruin in templis; uam ncc ipsi parieles seuliunl or-
naluin illum, nec eo indigenl ad liuem, ad queui
exslrucli sunt. Unde Persius:
Dicile ponlifices, in sanclo quld facil aiirutn ?
Terlia, quia non lanluni non prodest, sed eliam
obestsplendor ille templorum:nam avocat mentem,
et dislrahit a spirilualibus cogitalionibus.
Quarla.quia melius esl lempla viva ornare.quam
morlua;numquam autem desunl pauperes.qni lem-
pla sunt viva, et qui egent non solum ornalii, sed
eliain nccessaria suslenlalionc
Quinla, quia in judicio non damnabilur , qui
lcrnplum non ornaveril auro et argenlo; sed qiii in
|)aupere Chrislum non aluerit.Haec sunt igilur illo-
rum argumenla, qiiae elsi inagnam vim liabere vi-
deanlur, nihil tamen adversus verilatcm poterunl;
iiiliil enini polenlius verilale. Porro soluliones ho-
rum arguinenlorum in boc eodem capite, post ex-
plicatam cl confirmatam sentenliam Ecclesiae ad-
ierenlur.
Siligilur prima propositio: Opus bonum ct pium
exgcnere suo est. ingentiljus suniptibus templa
Dei aedilicare aut oniare. Probalur Primo.exTc-
slamenlo veleri; nam Deiis voluit. laberuaculuin
oinalissimiiin esse, ila iil omnia fcrc inslriiuienla
sanctuarii aurea esscnl, usqucad emunctorii larn-
padiim. Corlinas aiilcm laberuaculi cl vestes sa-
ccrdoiis esse voluit preliosissimas, cx scrico, bys-
so, piirpura. gemmis elc. et nc dccssent arlificcjs,
donavil sapienliain el arlcm ad oninia illa facicnda
cerlis quibusdam viris. Vide Exod. 25. 26. 27. 28.
20. .^0. :m. 35. 36. 37. 38, el 39. Deinde Num. 7,
singiili principes obluierunl lu oriialum labernaculi
immensa donaria auri el argenli. David paravil in
sumplus tem[)li. tanluin auri, argenti et lapidum
preliosorum, ul inoredibile videalur, lege 1. Pa-
rali[)om. cap. ult. elpemilt. el lib. 2. cap. 3. 4. et
r>..\l cerle raliones,quac fiuiit contra ornalum lem-
plorum uoslrornm, si (piid valerenl, mililarenl et-
iam conlra tabcrnacnluin Moysis et lemplum Sa-
loinonis.Nam lunc eliam non (Jeerant plurimi pau-
pcres: tunc ctiain parieles non sentiebanl ornalum
suum: tunc ctiain (Jislrahere polerant mentes oran-
lium: et lainen non [iropterca ccssatum esl a nia-
giiilicenlissiina aedilicalione templi et laberna-
ciili.
Secnndo, e\ Teslamenlo novo ; nam in primis-
Marci 12. Chrislus laudavil viduam, quae in gazo-
phylaciuin l(Mnpli misil duo minuta , idest omnem
victuni suum. Si ergo vidua illa reclc fecit. in do-
naria Dei expcndens omnem victum suum: quuino-
do argui possnnt, qiii donaul sallem pariem bono-
rum suorum, ad ornandam Dei domum? Ilem c.l3.
dicenlibus a|)oslolis: Magister aspice, quales la-
pidos et qualcs struclurae? Dominus occasioocin
habuit o|)limam reprehendeudi niagnificeuliam il-
jam tcmpli, vel Siiltcm instruendi discipulos, di-
ceiido, licuis^c in Tcstamento veteri oruare lem-
pla, al in legc evangelica non fore licitum. At Do-
minus iiihil lale dixit. Itcm cap. H.cum Judas ac-
gre ferrel, qiiod Magdalena in unclionem capilis
Doniiiii tantos sumplus facerel, ac dicerel: Vt quid
perdilio ista. unguenti facta est? polerat enim,
-ungucnluni istud venundari plus quani Ireccntis
dcnariis. et dari pauperibus, Dominus respondil:
Jionuni opus operata est in mc. Al si licuit prae-
teriiiissis pauperibus lanto suinptu inungere caput
Domini. cur non liceat etiam magno sumplu aedill-
carc domuin ipsi Doinino?
Terlio. probatur ex valicinio Isaiae;nam cap.6().
ubi falenliir praecipui cxpositores ad lileram agi
de Ecclesia chrislianain lerris existente, siclegi-
mns; Domum majestatis mea glorificabo.Et infra:
Me enim insulae expeetant , ut adducam filio»
iuos dc longe: auruni eorum.et argentumeorum
nomini Domini Dei tni. Et infra : Aedificabunt
liiii pcregrinorum muros luos, et reges eorum
ministralmnl tibi. Et infra: Gloria Libani ad te
vcniet, abies, et buxus.el pi7ius,siniul ad ornan-
d,umlocum sanctificationis meae.et locumpedum
nieorum glorillcabo. Quae prophelia ad lileram
iinpleta est tempore Conslinitini . aliorumque prin-
cipura, qui ccclesias magnificenlissimas exstruxe-
runt, et ornarunt.
Quarlo, probalur ed Patribus. Ensebius lib.9. hi-
slor. cap. io. Exquo aderat , inquit, cunctis ve-
lut divino munere infusa laetitia.maxime viden-
tibus ea loca, quae paulo ante impiis lyranno-
rum mackinis fuerant destructa , rediviva con-
sinictione clariora, et cclsiora consurgere . tem-
plaque excelsa pro humilibus conventicuUs cle-
vari.
Cyrillus catccliesi 14. Istt qui nunc sunt regesy
inquif, pietaiis ergo argcnlo induentes et auro
siuiclam hanc Ecclesiani resurreclionis, in qua
LIUKU IMllllb
ISI
tinnc fttinw, cx.^li'nx.tiranl , cl iirjcnlcia mjumi-
fU('u(((« hitlvndnltim cljfcnrunl.
,\IIhiMiI.sIii> iil ii|)i)l()^i;i iiil (Inn^LiiiliDiii linlliiit,
lil) i|)M) ('.oil.tliiiillii i'\slrini;iiii Alr\.iliilriiw' l<itii ln
|;«Mll<1|ll l)il>lli(MIII, llt IM Mtlil ClllllTI' |l()>M'l |ln|)ll-
liiiii, i|iii'iii iili;in ('ii|)(M'ii iiiiii polcriiiil. I\i*t|iii' ni-
l>ri'lirii(lil. M'il liiiiiliil liiiiu: cjiis iii i;;iiilli'i'iili;iiii.
(irc^oriii^ ii.i/.i.iii/.niiis ornl. t. iii .liili;iiiiiiii,riiiii
(li,\issi*l II (iiillo lUJiili iiiii (i\li'iii iM)r|))sM' iiLuiniiH
Miiii|)liliiis l);i'>ilir.iiii siiiirlo iiiiiiivii M.iii;)!'. y\i\>-
|iiii;;il liilliii^ (i.illi |t('o iicccpll.-^^iiiitiiii lni'^- •' nl
i|iioii(liiin luil siicrillciniii Alicl.
(irc^oiiiis iiyssciui.s or;il. in 'riicoiiniiiiii (in il ,
UMn|)ltiin s. Tlicodon in.i^MiillctMilis^iiiiiiiii , cl or-
ii;iii.s>iiiiiiiii picUiris cl scnlpliiris rnissc: cl lioc inl
Kluriiini siincli ni:i\iiiio piMliiicn', ui)i ii|)('rl(^ lintil.il
usnin (Mi^ciuli liili.i tcnipt.i.
.loiinncs cliry^ostoiniis lioiuil. (iCt. :iil pi)piiliiiii
Amioc.lu.Muiiu: Scnnnim. iiKpiii , f.rucili.vi sffnil-
cltrti rciiiiii tiuU si/ii/ rhiriorti, non. nKiiinitiKlinr.
cl pulchnludinc {uutilicioruin \^n(ini cl in. lujr sii-
Itc.rtinl) «(•(/. (iiuid iniilto viiijin^ vslxonionifntiinn
}itudio. Iilciii lioiii. ,'»1. iii .M;illh..\('c' j)»'(j/j(6f;o, iii-
(piil, nuiiiniiicn trniiihi condcrc ctc.
(lyrillus initio libri ilc rccl;i rnlc. ml ro^iir.is. Yttl-
dcsainenlcr, iiupiil, o/icnn/i dnlis. ut ijuac Chri-
s/o }a'ohantu.r. clscnlialis, c/ facialis: parliin o-
pcnlais cl irrciachcnsHiili conspicua fidc. c/ vc-
alras, cl rcijuin aula^ virijinilaliK ijloria decora-
tis: parliniiaunpluoi^it^f^iina C.hri^lo lcinpla criijL-
li^; conccasunicniin ct lioc cs/ cunialiis,ab ipt^ti,
vcstris aniniabus.
TlioophyliicUis in c:ip. II. !^l;irc.('()?i/"i/H(/fr)i/i/.r.
iiiipiil, hoc loco.qui pait-pcrcs Clirislo pracfcrunl.
Kl inrra : Audianl ijitur (juomodo Chrislus prac-
fcrtit sui curain paupcribus. Christi aulRni cor-
pus propric. (]Uod in dif^co aurco.cl sanguis.qui
iii poculo. Qui iijilur abstulcril discuni prctio-
suin.ct co(jil,ul corpus Chrisli inviLiori ponalur,
praetexens scilicet pauperes , scial cvjus pa/"-
tis sit.
Jani e.\ Lalinis.OpliiiUS lib.C.lcslalur.suo lcnipo-
ve luibuisse Kcclesuiiu preliosa vas;i sacrainento-
ruiu, quac Doualisl;ie diripicnles couflarunt el vcu-
diileruiit.
Auibrosius lib. 2. ile olTiciis, cap. 2\.Etmaxime
soicerdoli. iuqiiil , hoc convenit.ornare Dei teni-
plum decore conjruo. ut etiaiH hoc cullu aula
Domiiii rcspLendeat.
Ilieronyinus iii episl. ad Demelriadera.poslquani
dixeral: Aliiaedificenl ccclcsias.vesliant parietes
viarmorum crustis etc. sul)juugil: i\oureprelien-
do, non abnuo; sed tibi aliud propositum est etc.
Kl lu cap. 8, Z.icliariae.referl lugloriain Kcclesiac
el l;iudeiii priucipuiu, (piod euiii aliquol iuiperalo-
res elhuici ecclesias cverleriut . rursuui alii basili-
cus e.\siru.\eriul et exallaveriut, surama fastigia, et
laqucaria, ac tecla auro decorariut, et parietes di-
versi marmoris eruslis vesliennt.
Auguslinus in psalui. 113. Sed et nos , inquit ,
jAeraque inslrumenta el vasa ex auro etargento
liabemus, in usum celebrandorum sacramenlo-
ruin. quae ipso ministerio consecrala sancta di-
cuntur.
l'rii(l<'iiliiM In liyiiinii (b; « l.itiireulio Uflfcii ■
liKpicnlciii lyijiiitiiim :
Ifitm (•«nf vcntri» itniit»
,W irci/K/io' «•/ (if/ciii jtiiiilttumf»l,
/Alfi' «/i'.i'i;ifniiiiii /
/ t/'CM/ lll Hlini (iiili
Anifnlfi» xcf//i/iiM ffrunt
/'(Miuirc Kiii iiim inmiuiwin,
Anrniiiir nnrliirnoi jok ri*
.4<hlari' llrim cfnut»,
P.iiiliniK tialali 3. s. Kcliris:
.4i<rca iiiiiic tiii ci.s uriKinlnr Itininn vcUh clr.
Prosper in lih. iW. promission. el [irjiedicliori,
p;ir. .'{. (^ip. 'IK. (hcil . Icinplinn ;iiiiplissiriiiiin Deo
\(M(i c(iiiscim;iIiiiii siio lcnipori: . ciijns l.inl:i erat
iii;i^Miiluil() cl e.\coll<Miliii, iil eli:iiii pliileam li!ib(iret
()ii;ic ;id ipsiiMi ducchiil. (Inoriitn niilliiini p:issiiiini
|()ii^'iludiiiis lot.iin pretioso p;iviincnlo. cl cohiiiinis
:ic. miiris ornatiini.
(^Miiiilo. prohatur c\ pietiilc eoriim. (pii ecch si.is
;icditl(Miiiiit. iiiini pr;i(M'ipni fucrinil (pi;ituor. ("on-
sl.iuliiiiis. .Iiisliiiiiiiius, (l;ir()|iis .Mii;,Miiis , ct (laro-
Ins IV. l)o ('onstiintiiii tcmplis vide Damasum in
vilii Sylvestri. cl Kiischiuin lii). .1. el i. de vit.i
(lonsliintiiii. I>c lcmplis a Jiistiniiino ercclis. vide
rrocopinm in lib. de nedificiis .lusliniani. l)e lcm-
plis Ciiroli M;i;:iii. vidc Ahl)'ili'tn urspcrgenscm in
chronico. De lcinplis Ciiioli IV.vide Jo;iiinem Co-
chhicum iuitio lih. 1. hisloriiic Hiissilarum. Con-
slat iiuleni C'inst;inliiiuni sanctum iiii|)er;itorern
fiiisse; n;iin in c;ileiidario rir;iccoruin cjiis noiiicii
iiilcr s;iiici()ri!m iiomiiiii luibetur : et ab .\mhrosio
iu or:Uione dc ohitii Theodosii, ;ih Kpiplianio liae-
resi 70. (pi;ie cst Audianoriim. a Cyrillo. eateche-
si li.el ;iliis P;ilribus p;issiin sauclus el beatus ap-
pellalui .
Siinilil(>r Cirolus .Magnns lamquam snnclus eoli-
liir pr;iccipiie Pirisiis el A^iuisgraui. et ;ib oinni-
bus liisloricis mirilicc hiudiitur. Juslinianus. exce-
pla bacrcsi, in quain iiicidil in exlrema ael;itc.lau-
(filissiinus princeps Uiit. Porro Ciiroluin IV. opli-
miiin et relii^fiosissiinuin fuisse. palet ex iis , (juae
adferl Cochlaeus loco notato. Miiltas ilem aedifica-
rutil el oniiininl basilicas sanclissiini poiilifices ,
Juliiis, D:iin;isus, Lco, Symraichus . et alii. qui el
aule iiiille aiiuos florueruul. el vere sancli scriplo-
ruin omniMm conseusu bahili sunl. Non est aulcm
criMiibilc.ilii pios pnncipes.lum ccclesiaslicos.lum
polilicos, iii ejusmodi opera conspirare polulsse ,
si ea Deo non plaeercnl.
Prohatur nltiiuo ralionibus. Priraa ratio ex ma-
gnitudine Dci: nani doraus quo majori principi :ie-
dificalur. eo debet esse major.Quis autera Deo ma-
jor? Qn^vQ Salomon hb. 2. Paralip. cap.-l.Domus.
quam aedificare cupto. inquit. magna esl:magnus
esl enim Dcus noster supcr omnes Deos.
Secunda ratio ex ipso genere operis : nara ex-
struere Doo splendidum leraplum , est e.x gcnere
suo aclus duaruin excolleulium virlutum , religio-
nis ac mngniflcentiae ; proinde bonus ex generii
suo.
532
DE CLLTtl SA.^CTORUM
Torlia ratio, quia non solum csl aclus illaruin
virluluni, setl eliani esl cxerciliiim cl signum alin-
runi. .>'ntn (]ui niagnilicum lempkun erigil , magni-
licum Uvslimoniuni cilil lUlei suac, el cliarilalis ei'-
ga Dcum: necnon pielatis el gvaliludinis, ct quia
pccuniae summopcrc (iiliiii solcnl. (jui cas libcra-
lilcr ad liouorcm Dci expcndil, in(.iical se vcre di-
ligere Deum super omnia.
Qiiarla ralio al) ulililalc: Nam lcmplum magnifi-
ce ornalum. mullas liabcl utililalcs. Primum cnim
jitlraliil homiiies lacilius ad res pias, quac in lem-
plis iieruntur; nec enim obscura ct sordida loca
libcntcr rrcqucnlantur. Dcindc conservat raajesta-
teni sacraracntoruin, et rcvcrentiara. quae rebus
divinis debetur;l\am quando videmus allare splcn-
diilum et ornatimi, facih^ crigimus mentcm. cl co-
gitanms magnum csse Deum, cui lalia cxlnbenlur:
el econtrario facilc conlcmnitur, qnod sine appara-
tu proponilur. Tcrtio juvatur piclas ct dcTotio, ma-
xime simplicium, quorum maximus est numerus.
Accedit etiam corporalis utililas, quod magnilica
lcmpla diutius conscrvanlur, et raagno splendori
sunt civitati. Multitudo quoquc aurenruin, alque
argentcorum vasorum, sacpc fuit saluti loli rcipu-
blicae, dum in communi caplivilate, fame aut pe-
stCjEcclesiac Ihesaurus multis raillibns miserorum
opem lulit, ut quasi in id tempus divinitus datus
cl servatus viderelur.
Quinla ralio a contrario: qui ecclesias vastave-
runt, aut diripuerunt, semper sacrilegi el perditi
habiti sunt, saepe eliam divinitus punili. ul palcl
dc Balthasare, Daniel. 5. de Ilcliodoro, 2. Macha-
baeorum 3. de Antiocbo, 2. Machabaeor. 9. Scri-
bit eliam s. Joanncs chrysostomus hom.4. in Mal-
Ih.quo lempore Julianus apostata jussit diripi lem-
plorum ornamenta, et praecipue sacra vasa, raox
quaestorcm regium pcr medium diruptum expiras-
se, et Juliani avunculum a vcrmibus corrosum in-
teriisse. Scribunt quoque Cedrenus el Zonaras,
Leonem filium Constanlini Copronymi, cum abs-
lulisse a lemplo insigncm coronam, quam Mauri-
lius imperator donaverat ad ornatum tcrnpli, mox
sensisse in caiute suo ignilos carbunculos, inde
concepla febre ardentissima pcriissc.
Secunda propositio: Acdificare, vel ornare iem-
j)la, licct sil opus pium et honum, polest tamen
ejusdem opus ex defectu circumstantiorum faci-
le vitiari. Probalur; quatuor enira sunl circum-
slantiae praecipuae, ex quarum defectu malum erit
ornare tcmpla, nimirum lempus, locus, raodus el
pcrsona. INam in primis quando quis tenetur juva-
re proximum, ac praeserlim parentes, aut filios, ct
non potcst simul providere proximo, et donare
lemplo: tunc non rectc facil. si negleclis parenli-
bus,vel proximis aediOcct tcrapla. Ait enim Domi-
nus Osee. (j.Misericordiam volo,non sacrificium,
Et Marc. 7. rcprehenduntur Pharisaei, qui doce-
bant filiosfamilias offerre templo donaria,cum de-
Irimcnto parentum. Patet id etiam ex Paulo adRo-
nian. ;>. qm docel, non esse facienda mala, ut ve-
niant bona. Dcnique ex praxi sanctorum. qui lem-
pore magnac neccssilatis pauperuni,conIlarunt ca-
lices ot vendiderunt, ut palel ex Ambros. lib. 2.
dc ofTiciis cap. 28. Si enim tcmpore nccessilatis
rccle pastores dclrabunl ecclcsiae ornamcuta, ccr-
tc multo reclius non danlur ecclesiae,',quae essent
aufercnda, si dala fuissenl.
Ncquc obstal iactum viduae. quac Iribnit in do-
naria Dci omnem viclnm suum; Nam non tribuit
viclum patris. aut filiorum, sed suunr.et suum noii
muliurum dicrum, scd uiiius laiitum: ncque enim
duobus minutis polerat diu sustenlari.
Dcindo quanlum ad locura, ccrtum cst, non o-
mnia loca aequalemornalum rcquirerc;Nam in ma-
gnis urbibus, ad (juas mulli confluunt, splendida
leinpla esse debent; al in loois desertis. nbi soli
monachi vcri^aniur, non videlur convenirc, ul lot
sumplus fiant in acdificiis lemplorum. El hoc est,
quo(J b. Bcrnardus praecipue reprehenditin apoio-
gia ad Guliolmum, quod videlicol raonachi clunia-
censos vellcnt habcro oraloria sua tam magna. et
lam ornala, ul aequaront, vel suporarenl splendo-
rcm ei)iscopaIium ecolcsiarum; ubi eliam merito
rcpreliendit, quod in pavimento sculpcrent, vel
pingercnt saaclorum imagines, et cogerentur qui
in ooruin occiesiis spuere necesse haberep.l,in la-
cicm angclorum, vel aHorura sanctorum humi de-
piclorum spuere.
Quanlum ad modura, peccatur. cum ornamenta
lemplorum suntvana, ac potius curiositali, quam
roligioni dcs2rvienlia:qualia erant in oratoriis Clu-
niacensium,quae b. Bornardus reprehendit in apo-
Icgia ad Guliolmum: Qiiid facit, inquil, illa ridi-
cuta momiruositas? Qaidibi immundae simiae?
quid, feri leoncs? qiiid monslruosi centauri? quid,
scm.iliomines? quid maculosac tygrides? quid
mililes puquantes? quid venatorcs tubicinantes?
Yideas sub uno capilc multa eorpora, el rursus
in uno corpore capita multa. Cernitur hinc in
quadrupede cauda serpentis, ilUnc in piscc ca-
pnt quadrupedis: ibi bestia praefert eqMim, ca-
pram iraliens relro dimidiam: hinc cornulum a-
nimal equum geslatposlerius. Tam multa deni-
que, tamque mira diversarum formarum ubique
varielas apparct, ul magis lcgere liceal in mar-
moribus, quam in codicibus, totumque diem oc-
cupare singulaista mirando, quamin lege Dci
mcdilando.
Quantum ad personam, pcccalur, quando quis
supra suum slalum cl conditionom vult ornare
templa. Nam si qui paupertaiem profilcnlur, etvi-
clum ab aliis emondicant, vellent aedificarc tem-
plum marmoreum, et auro, ac gemmis ornare, et-
jamsi forle possent elecmosynis, hinc inde conqui-
sitis, idfacere, tamen non decere eorura professi-
onem, magnificentia enira non esl monachorum,
sed principum. Quarc hinc etiam merito arguit s.
Bernardus cluniacenses in illa apo!ogia,quod cum
monachi esscnl, lamen sumplibus, ac magnificen-
lia regos aequare vellenl.
Superest, ut ad arguinenla iuitio proposita re-
spondeamus. Ad illud igitur, quod objicicbatur ex
Ilieremia: Nolite confidereinvcrbis mendaciidi-
centcs: templum Domini, tcmptum Domini, res-
poiideo, a prophcta eo loco argui Judaeos, qui
confidenles in cxlerno templo, putabanl apud se
esse Dcum, el se diligi a Deo, nec essc ventura
ca mala, quac praedicebantnr a prophetis, quia
Lllll.ll ll.ltlllS
usi
liMii|)liiin hi'i tiptiil s«' liilirlcinl, i>li;im';l ip';! inlr**
lllll lllillc Vivciltlti l".^i'||l |t'|up|;i ill.ililill. .Nlllll Iltl-
Inii rlllcil i.<ilii i-i'pi'(>lii'i)>ii) iiilvcrMiiii (icililli-iiln)-
liciii, iii ii.iliiiiiipn- lciiipl.iiiiiii; ^.iiii cIm icpii'lii'ii-
(liliir iiiiiii.i liiliii lii iii c\i' iiii) lciiipliiriiiii t-ullii,
priui.suilllll cuiii nci;||^iliir ('iilliis iiiiiiiil, l.inicii iinii
pidplcrcii nuii siiiil iicilillciiinl.i, jitipic i'\urn;inil:i
lciiiplii iiil liuiiurciii |)ci ci siiiicluriiiM iiiciiiuri.iiii.
|il ipsinii rcspuii.lcDtliiiii cnIiiiI lcsliiiiuiiiinii s. Ilic-
i-oiiyiiii; i|)si^ (miiiii rcprcliiiinlil cus. ipii duii cii-
riiiilcs llcri lciiipl.i Dci licnc vivcntlu, piit:iiil silii
(iiiiiiKi tiil.i cssc, si lciiipliim c\lcriiiiiii iiciliricctil.
niil «iriKMil.
Atl scciiiiilniii, ipiiiil c\ Ilicrun\iiii vcrhis siiiii-
pliiiii cst, iit (-(iiiiinoilc rcspuiiilc.ilnr, (pi;icil.iiii ;iti
lcii priiciiolaiKla siiDl. Oliscrvii i^iiltir pritno.prdpo-
.siliini llicronymn cssc, iil rcprclicndiil ros.ipii iiiii-
jorcm ciir.itn liiilicni lcmpli m;ilcriiilis, ipiiim spiri-
liiiilis, idcst. (pii iicilirtciii niiriiliilttcr iiriiiint, cl tii-
IDCD iioD oiiruDl iiD 11(1 sacni miDJslcria (;lii;iiiiliir i-
(loDci.vcl Don itlonci. Sic cnim ituipil nicruiiymiis
Ciitn rc(irclionsioiK'm urualus lcmploriim: Miilli.
impiil, ncdilicanl pariclas, cl columiiaa ccclcaiuc
subalnnnil: iiun'nit>ra uilnil: (nn'o sjilcnitcnl la-
qiictnia: ijcnnnis allarc ditilin(iuilnr:ii uiinislro-
runi ('hrisii nuUa clcclio csl. lliicc illc. (piao vc-
rissim.i sutii, cl rucruDl scmpiM',
Sccimdo Dol.i, ornaluDi liihcrnaruli c\ Irmpli
.Tiulacunim idupio modu lypicum ct Ciicroiiionia-
lcm fuissc; Uibcrnaculiim CDiui cl tcmplum riim
vuuu suii supcllcclilo iij!ur;io fuonitil Kcclcslao
C.lirisliauiio. ul patcl c\ Jiioobi coDciouc Actor. 1j.
ubi do Kcclosia cxpoiiuul vcrba Auios. cop. \).Posi
hacc rcvcrlar, cl rcacdilicaho labcrnacuhnn /)a-
ru/, qu)d dccidil, cl dirula cjus rcacdijlcaho. cl
criijaniillud. llcm c\ raulol. Coriulli. 10. 0-
mnia contingcbant HUs in jiijura. ncDiquc idcm
palol c.\ illa acouriilissima doscriplionc loiupli.
(|uae babolur H/.och. 40. ot scqucnlib. cl cx co,
quod diotum cst Sloysi. ul facorel omoia accuralc
ad cxcmplar. quod iu Dionlc vidcrat Exod. 2.'».
Quia or^^o taberuaculum cl lempUim ftgurac eraiit.
idco neccsse crat. ul csscnl talia qualia fucrunt,
ncc pijtcraiil aliquid niinus vcl magis habcrc. quia
alioqul non rcclo ropi-acscnlasscnl.n ctiani in Srri-
plura, si una litoru mutclur. non amplius signili-
cal id, quod antca signilicabal.
Et (|uoniani figurae Tcslamcnli vcleris jnm sunt
completae, el lc.\ cacremonialis abrogala csl: ideo
qui nunc pxislimarel cssc nccessarium lale tem-
plum. (|uale fuit Judacorum. superslitiosus essel ,
ut boc lcmporoJudaci vcrc supcrstiliosi sunt. dum
exisltmanl uon liccre sacrificare nisi in templo lali,
qualc fcceral Salomon. El in hoc sensu reprehen-
dil llioronymus tomplorum ornamenta: ?sam eliam-
si inodu luilli sunl inler Chrislianos.qui rcvera exi-
stimcnl tcmpla necessario rcquirerc illum orna-
Uim. ut exislimabanl Judaei, tamcn dum antcpo-
nunt curain fahricae malcrialis ipsi elcctioni mini-
strorum, etacdificio spitiUiali , vidcntur faclis ali-
quo modo airines superslilioni Judacorum. Quod
cliam nolavil b. Rcrnardus in apolop:ia ad Gulicl-
muui ahbalcm: .llilii. i[n\\.i\[.quodaniniodoreprac-
acnlanl anliquum rilum Jndacorum.
l!t:il'.RMi.\; Vol. II.
Nnlii Irrlio. laJM^rMiinili «'l tfinpli Jutl.iconini or-
nilllllll IIOII '«olllliM ,|iMc|||u|||,i|(MII cl Ijpiciiiii (ui^ .u,
Hcil Dtliiiii iiioriiliMii; iN.iiii rltaiiiKi iiiilliiM rri ni.Mtra
fiiissciil, liiiicii ratlu jps.i iiiiliir.ilin dicl.mM;!, (!<!■
iDiiiii hci ormiliiiii csHi; di;bcre: cl liuc mudi) rcclc
Ir.iliiiiiiis orii.iltiiii tiibrriiiiriili ul t(;iii|)ll Jiidaco-
riim, iii cNi-mpluin nuslrorniii ti;mpliiriiiii. Ni!i|un
lioc iiiKpi.iiii rcprcluMidit llicroiiyiiius , jiiiino di-
siM'((^ dicil iii cpislul.i jid hciiictriiidi;tii:.Vori ubnna,
non rcprchrndu.
Ad lcriiimi (>\ Ambrosiu ( i|ii(hI (i.ilMno^ .idfcrl
in cpislol.i pr.ii'li\,i iiislitiitioiii) dico.iii vcrbls Aiii-
liioMi miiliii i!s.su cunlrii .'idvi^rsarius, niliil cuiilr.i
iios. iNiim priino Aiiilirosius dicil, .'lurca vasa Kc-
clcsiao iiuii ili;bcri; ii|i(;ii:iri, iiisi in iiin^iiii paupc-
ruiii ncci;ssitidi!; Kccli;sia i^ritur co (cmporo ubibu*
liir :iiir(Ms vasis. Sucuiido dicit, si ii(;ccs.sc si( alic-
iiiiro vasa E^-closiac, (;.>sc dilij/ciilcr (piacroDdiiiii ,
aii iion sinl iiliipiii noiidutii iniliiila, ct si (alia iiivc-
nianliir, iion cssc ullo inudo altiii^cnda vasa inilia-
tii; cr^'o ttitic rcrto rilii vasa coiis(;criili;iiilur. Tcr-
lio di(-il, si ncccssc sil vciidcro vas:i itiiliata, iion
dcboro vcndi inlopra, scd prius connari, ct dcindc
pcr p;irl(\s vciidi: ld quod TK^ri d(;hcro nos libciitcr
iidmiltiiniis, :i((pii Ii:ioc oiniiia pu;;tiant advcrsus
hiicrcticus hiijus lemporis. qui ncc proliusa, ncc
ccrto ritu consccrata: E( baiic(ii, vasa sacramcido-
rum ossi; volunl.
Quod cr^o .Ambrosius iiil (auruni sacramcnla
non quacrunt) noii sigiiilicat , sacr:imi'nl;i nnllo
modo riMpiirorc auruin. sed iiou roipiircrc c\ ne-
cossit;ilo. quamvis ri;<iuir:iiil c\ decciilia , ipiando
habcri polcst.cl quod subjuni,Ml (nec auro piaccnt
quac auro non cniunlur) nou siL(tiilic;il , iti ;iiiro
disiiliconl, vcl nullo modo piiicciil ma^is in iiiiro .
(pi;un in aliit matoria; scd noii ideo principalilor
placenl. quia niinistrantur in auro.Si cniin in auro
displiccrcnt. vcl noii mapis placorenl, quiini in a-
lia malcria, Ambrosius iion servasset illa vasa us-
que ad eam nccessitalem, sed numquam illis usus
fuisscl.
Ad qiKirlum, dc .Vcacio, dico : Vcrba illius epi-
scopi babcrc cundeni sensum ; iNam cum ccclesia
illa abunditrel cjusmodi vasis aureis (ul ibidem
scribil Socralcs) ct occurrissel summa quaedam
noccssitas redimcndi c;iplivos, ille siinclus cpisco-
pus vendidil partem vasorum el redemil capiivos
ad quinquc inillia. Illa aulem cjus vcrha (Deus no-
sler non egel discis. neque caiicibus , quia non
comedil. ncque bibil) significanl. isla vasa nuUam
Deo ulililatem adferrc, sed haberi in Ecclesia ad
honorem Dei, ct noslram utililalem. el idco quan-
do occasio se oirerl. qua possinl esse ulilioia no-
bis. si vendanlur. debenl vcndi.quia hoc eliain erit
Deo gralius et miigis Iionorificum.>"am.ul Ambro-
sius ait. valdft pulchrum et honorificum Christo
est. cum dici potesl: hos paupercs Christus rede-
mil: vel etiam calix Chrisli non soium sanguioe ,
quem continel. captivos rcdirail, sed etiam prelio
valoris: calix cnim rcdimil ab hoslo quos sanguis
redemil a pcccato.
Ad quiiilum, cx Hilario.leslimonium Hilarii non
esl ad propositum: iion enim agil ille de ornalu
templi, sGd eos reprehendil, qui in templo hacre'
63
S34
DE CULTl SANCiOUlM
tii'uin opisoopiini, idosl. Anxonliuni oudicbant, co
qiiod exisliniaienl ibi lanluin esse verani Eccle-
siam, el veruni episcopum, ul)i eral lemplum Deo
SiUTum:el non considcrabant lcmpia siiepe ab bac-
rcticis occnpari, el veros catbulicos vel in cryplis,
vel in deserlis saepe versatos.
Ad sexlum, ex Lactanlio. Lactantius probare vo-
lebat,inepie a genlilibus offerri munera idolis,idesl
Di s non senlienlibus: Fruslra , inquil. Iiominc.s
auro. ebore, gemmis, Deos excolunt el exornant,
quasi vero ex liis rebus nllani possinl capere vo-
luplalem. Quis usus est preliosorum munerwm
niliil sentientibus? Hoc autem probal ex Persio ,
qtn \c\\i sopienler scribit. non dcbere aurea vasa
lemplis inferri, quasi illis dclcclenlur Dii lignei et
nvtirmorei, cum nibil sentiant, sed polius oportcret
Diis vivenlibus ofierri, ut ipse dicil:
Compositumjus, fasque animi, aancloaqne recessus
Meniis, el incocluni generoso pcclus honeslo.
Ilaque non reprchendilur aurum lerapli,quando
bonum usum habet, idest, excilandi ad pietatcm ;
sed sohmi reprehendilur, quaudo sic oirerlur Deo ,
quasi is corporeus sil, cl rcbus ejusmodi corpora-
liler delecletur.
Ad seplimum, ex Bernardo,dico:Bcrnardum non
rcpreheiulere simpliciler ornalum lempli, scd or-
nalum, qucm templis suis monachi Chiniacensos
adbibcbant. Nani nt ex apologia ilia colligilur, re-
prehcndit s. Bernanlus ['limo, quod monacbi ,
professionr pauperes. erigerenloraloria in immcii-
sani altiluflinem, quod eorum professioni non con-
veniebal. Secundo, quod dum lempla sua ila or-
narent. faterenlur se esse carnalcs ct infirmos.
Ornatus enirn lcmplorum illis ecclesiis potissimum
convcnil, ad qnas populus coiifluere solel , quia
simphccs homines egent ejusmodi rebus. Unde
ibidem ait : Et quidem alia caussa est episco-
porum, alia monachorum. Scimus namque quod
illi , sapicnlibus et insipientibus debitores cum
s^int , carnalis populi devolionem , quia spiri-
tualibus non possunt, corporalibus excitanl or-
namentis. Terlio reprehendit , qiiod qiiacshis
caussa ornarenl lempla.nimirum ul plures conflii --
rent ad oirercndum. Quarto,quod cum injuria san-
ctorum humi sculpercnt imagines. Quinlo , quod
bona, (]uae accepcrant dislribuenda pauperibus ,
insumerent in illa ornamenla, quando pauperes
valdc indigebant. Sexio, quod ornamenla vana ad-
hibercnt lcniplis, qnac solain curiosilalcm pasce-
re, non aulcm piclatem excilarc valcrcnt. Porru
liaec omnia merilo reprehendunlur.
Ad octavum ex Chrysoslomo, dico : Eum non
negarc.iicilum esse lcinpla magnifice exslruerc, el
ornare: sed soluni antcponere huic ornalui curam
pauperum: cujus opposilum docot Theophylaclus
Chrysosinmi discipulus in cap. Li. Marc. sed pos-
sunl facile conciliari. Sciendum igitur , absolulc
flielius esse honorare Deum in scipso , quam in
p;i; jcribiib: Nani cliaritasDei sempcr antcponi dc-
het cbarilati proximi.Vcrumlamcn qiiia Deus nulla
re indigel. cl quaeilli offerimus, vull nobis ulilia
esse, nou sibi: ideo lunc Deus mogis honoratur, et
fit illi rcs gralior, quandu quod illi oflerimus, est
liominibus utilius. Hinc igilur quando alicubi lcin-
pla salis bcne se habcnt, paupcres aulem nobili-
ler paliunlur egeslalem: tunc raelius cst dare pau-
pcribus eleemosynain, quam templo addere orna-
menta: elin hoc casu loquitur Chrysoslomus. Vi-
debat enim homines pronos admodum ad offeren-
da Ecclesiac donaria, ct negligentes in cura pau-
perum, in quo sensu etiam videlur dixisse Oseas
cap. 6. Misericordiamvolo,nonsacrificium,\(iesl,
malo misericordiam. quam sacriDcium.
At econlrario , si alicubi pauperes mediooriter
Iraclenlur, sed templa sinl inculla el deserta. et
proplerca decrescal piclns el devolio: tunc niclius
est ornare lempla, quia id est ulilius eliam proxi-
mo, cujus pielas et devolio juvatur illo ornalu: el
in hoc casu loquilur Theophylaclus. Quando aulem
esset aequalis indigenlia et lcmplorum. cl paupe-
rum, modo non sit cxtrcma, videretur melius daro
lemplo quam pauperi, quia pluris facienda esl in-
digenlia spirilualis, quam lemporalis, elquia orna-
tus lcmpli cslbonum durabilius , et commiiiiius ,
quam sit eleemosyna data pauperibus: et quia ma-
gis immediale datur Deo.
A(l piimam ralionem dico Iria. Primo. Clirislum
fuissc paiipcrem,npc rcquisivisse propter so ullain
ponipam. vel delicias in hoc inundo : lamen non
reciisassc inlerdum sumpluosa obsequia . quihus
videbal ali et augeri piorum devolioncm. ul palet
dc ingressu cjus in Ilicrusalem super asinura: in
quo libenler admisil. ut mulli slernerent vesles
suas in via. quae pcdibus jumenli ilbus conculca-
banlur. el forte etiam laccrabanlur Mallh 21. pa-
let eliam dc uiigucnlo pretiosissimo . quo cauul
suum. cl pedes inungi passus esi Mallh. 26. et
Joan. 12.
Socundo dico: Quod Chrislus fuerit paupcr. el
stabulum, ac pannos etvilcs cibos amaveril. ideo
faclum esse, quia isla congruehant tempori morla-
litalis ejus. Veneral cnim ut pateretur,et pcr labo-
res, ac dolores, mundum redimcrel: Al nuncpost
mortem et resurreclionem, cum gloriosus regr.ai
in coelo, convcnil illi domus magnifica.cl splendi-
dissima.
.\(lde lcrlio: Templa dicari Chrislo praecipuc ra-
lione divinilalis: qua ralione semper fuit dives rex
rcgum et dominus dominanlium. Daque rcclissime
exslruuntur illa lempla raagnirica, qualia Deo cou-
veniunt, licet ipse idem in lorrna servi. humilita-
tem et pauperlatem verbo, el exf-mplo docueri!.
Ad secundam dico : Kon esse oliosa ornamenta,
quii! sunl signa reverentiae, el pictatis nostrae er-
ga Deum, et excilant in animis hominum devotio-
ncm. Undc interroganli Pcrsio:
DicHe pontifices, in sanclo quid facil aurumP
Picspondcndum est, mulla bona facil, quae jam
cnumcravimus.
Ad lerliam dico : Ornamenla illa non fieri, ut di-
slrahant, sed ul excilcnl dfvotionem. Quod si ali-
qui distrahuntur, csl vilium illorum, qui abutanlur
rebus bonis:nisi forlc ornaincnla sinl omnino vana
el incpla, quae el nos reprcheudimus.
I
iiiii.ii ii:iiiiLS
I9S
A(l (|(iiirl)iiii (l(^ p.iiiprtiliiis iiJciKJiH.j.iiii rospiiii-
^iini (1^1. Aijilc, (pKMJ si pinpli'1' (inliihirKis pinipii-
rcs iKiii IkmmcI i^xsIi iicrc, vcl (iniiirc. Icinpl.i, iiiiil-
(d iiiitiiis lidcnU (iriKin^ piiliiiiii, iiislnicn^ ciuiviviii,
liiilicn* iippiiniliiiii iillniii c(pi()niiii,riiiiiiliiniiii,«'iir-
nilllll cllMpillll Si i^lil licilil Slllll IkI IIICIkI.IIII (li|^'lli-
t.llcilt III. 1)^11. irillll pcisilli.itlllll , IKHI lilislillllo pilil'
p(M'llltt tllllllillKlillC, CHr IKIII lil (Ml Clllllll 11(1 «'llll-
scrviiiKliiiii icriiiii siicruniii iii:iii"«l.ilciii lciiiplii «<\-
«iniiirc, iKni nlisl.iiilc p.iiipcriiitt iiKilliliiiiiiic'.'
Ail (ptiuliiiii (licd, .Miilllt. 2*i. tiiiii)(M'iiri opiMii iiii-
iKiril, (ll llKJir CMJIi^aiiiiis ipild ilc tiiii jnrililis scil-
liciKldiii sil; (licilitr (<iiiiii: llr iii iiinnn twlvniuin,
iiuia ('siii'i\-i.,i>lnoii tlctlislis milii iniintlucdrr: ci
iKni iliciiiir, ilo it) ii;tt(<iii iKMcriiiiiti . (jiiiii r.ipiiii.lis
:ili(.Mi:i, scil Ikic ii liciidn ilciltK-iliir lU illo. Il:i ct-
liiiit iiot) iliciliir, itc III i;;ticiii iictiTiiiiiti . (ptiii iiint
aodillciislis lciiipliiiii , scd ilcdii(;itiir Ikk; n tiiiijun.
.Si (Muiii diiiiiiiiiliiliir (pii iKiM IVcit clcciiiiisyiiiiin ,
(|iiiitKlo ciuii riiccrc tcit>'|)iiliir: iiiiiltii ttiii^is diiiiiiiii-
iMliir (pii iioii iKMlillcavil.vcl iioti repariivit, iiiti tioii
<M'iiiivil tciiiplitni. ipiiiiidi) id liicorc. UMicl>:;liir. (Mii
iiiliMii kMiciiiitiir.(!t i|iii tioii,aliii (piacsiio csl, iili|iii>
id rLMi) iiostratii iiiliit liicit.