# Leibniz Legible — https://leibnizlegible.com
# Page: https://leibnizlegible.com/page/167783496X:0201
# Permalink to this reading: https://leibnizlegible.com/page/167783496X:0201?run=74
# Title: [Libri Quinque Apologetici Pro Religione, Utraque Theologia, Moribus, Ac Iuribus Ordinis Praedicatorum. Adversus Theophili Raynavdi Tres, totidem Petri de Alua libros, aliquot Epistolas Ioa. Launoij, Expostulationes Carterij, aliosque: ...] Libri Qvinqve Apologetici Pro Religione, Vtraqve Theologia, Moribvs, Ac Ivribvs Ordinis Prædicatorvm. Adversvs Theophili Raynavdi Tres, totidem Petri de Alua libros, aliquot Epistolas Ioa. Launoij, Expostulationes Carterij, aliosque: ... (shelfmark Leibn. Marg. 210:4)
# Folio 141, page id 167783496X:0201
# Original at the GWLB: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/resolve?id=167783496X&page=201
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/167783496X/jpgs/default/00000201.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 42 lines, status machine
# Lines: 42 recognised, mean confidence 0.94
# Machine transcription. Not an edition. Errors are expected: about 8% character error rate on Latin and French lines, higher on German.
# Licence: CC BY 4.0, Leibniz Legible. Machine output: do not ingest it as verified text; keep this provenance with the text.
# Wording rule: say "the machine reads it as …", never "Leibniz wrote".
# After the first blank line: the recognised lines in reading order, one per line.

E Z AMEH. YII. E PYST.
sumenta desidero: mallem Theologum egister, gnan
oratorem. Ouid enim habet, quod impusnet Cajerani
ad Alimainum responsa Amainus ex Epistola cud-
dam Ambrosii operibus inserra, ee nonnussis inseripra
Damaso, quasi negarer sibi licere rem à Concilio
Capuano indicatam, ad examen rocare et relcinde-
re; inde infere summum Pontisicem subesse etiam
privaris Concilii nacionalis Decretis. Respondet Ca-
jetanus his Epiltolae rerbis, non negare Damasum
sibi porentiam deesse, sed minime convenire iusta
illud Apostoli, mihi omnia licent, non omnia expe-
diunt. Inde Consirmat Cajeranus, Ponciticem illud
iudicium derrectasse, non quia pocentia deessee, qu’à
valide indicaret Ced minime convenisse, id que exemplo
Pii I. negancis Marcionem a Parre damnacum ab(ol-
vere, contirmatum est.
Ouid affere Launoius, quod hunc Cajerani obie.
cum obicem effringar s videtur qua retellenda Cusce-
pic, luis aroumeneis contirmare, ee innicta probare.
Sic enim ce ConveniO, AHE negaS in TOrM id gCHUS
distinctionis, re quaedam liceaHE, nON expediaNE;
ralide tane, non inculpabiliter: vel quamvis legiri-
mam; ee vsu Frequentissimam infinieis difficulcatibus
enodandis hanc rerum parririonem oporcunam agnol-
cas, a subiecta quaectione ris exclusam. Si primum ob-
cenaas. REAnE Contra re omnes Theolooix, de iuris
consulcissimi, quibus nihil hac distinctione amilia-
sius, nihilque cerrius rerum qua raside hune plures
culpa nOn CareTC. ITa eHCaX est administratio SaCTa-
mentorum, ralidum pactum rendicionis, licet neu-
erum culpa inrerdum racet. Si legirimam concedas
hanc operarionum distinctionem, led IOcu haberE
nolis in causa Damasi; qua ratione id probas, nis
aperra pecitione principii: Neque enim aliud apud
ce lego, nih connicia in Cajeranumr, Encomia AI-
maini, denique Thesim ipsam in probationem a-
Sumpeam. Dilerca rbique habes, non Forria,
Aliam insinuac Caieranus distinctionem, legis cogen-
eis, de lirigeneis: quas ferunt Concilia, vel ips Ponci-
sices, livare concedic conscientiam directionis ri, non
bona cogentis. Ouare Caietanus remorissimus ab a