To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.
The vow single is of one and the same nature with the vow solemne, not distinguished by any essentiall but meere acciden∣tall difference. For thus writeth their owne Iosephus Angles.
* 1.1Votum solenne & simplex, ex parte subiecti specie acciden∣tali differunt, propterea quod voti simplicis subiectum est ad cō∣trahendum matrimonium habile, licet contrahendo peccet. At verò subiectum voti solennis, est ad contractum matrimonialem
inhabile, transgressiones voti simplicis & solemnis eiusdem spe∣ciei sunt, etiamsi qui solenniter vouet grauius peccet: ratio est, quia specifica differentia actuum est penes obiecta; & cum idem sit vtriusque voti obiectum, nempe seruare continentiam, erunt actus eiusdem speciei, erit tamen voti solemnis transgressio gra∣uior, ratione perfectioris status.
The vow solemne and single differ accidentally in respect of the subiect,* 1.2 because the subiect of the single vow is able to con∣tract matrimonie, albeit he sinne in so contracting: but the sub∣iect of a solemne vow, is inabled to matrimoniall contract: the transgressions of the vowe single and solemne are of the same nature or kind, albeit hee that maketh the solemne vow, sinneth more grieuously: the reason is, because the specificall dif∣ference of acts, resteth in the obiects; and since there is one ob∣iect of both the vowes, to wit, to keepe chastitie▪ the acts shall bee of the same nature or kinde; neuerthelesse, the trans∣gression of the solemne vow shall be greater, by reason of the perfecter state.
Thus reasoneth Frier Ioseph, after the opinion of other po∣pish doctours: and his discourse is euident, because euerie specificall difference morall, ariseth of the obiects; and con∣sequently, since the obiect of vow single is one and the same with the vowe solemne, the difference betweene them can no way be essentiall.
Ioseph. Angles in 4. q. de voto, ar. 6 diffic. 2.
These buildings and distinctions well obserued, poperie will receiue a deadly wound.