for one who is in a discussion not to know the law in question.

(_e_) From the fact that Jerome here quotes the example of Daniel, the
argument is derived that in doubtful cases recourse should be had to the
example of our forefathers and others. XVI. quaest. I. sunt nonnulli.
XXII. quaest. I. ut noveritis. I quaest. VII. convenientibus. XII.
quaest. II questa. XVI. quaest. III. praesulum. XVI. quaest. I. cap.
ult. XXVI. quaest. II. non statutum. et cap. non examplo. C. de sen. et
interlo. nemo[AB] contra. The solution is that where rules fail recourse
must be had from similars to similars, otherwise not. XX. distinct. de
quibus;[AC] assuming that it is as there stated. Likewise the argument
holds that good is assumed from the very fact that it has come from
something good. As VII. quaest. I. omnis qui. & XXXIIII. quaest. I. cum
beatissimus. IX. quaest. II. Lugdunensis. XII. quaest. I. expedit.
XXVIII. quaest. I. sic enim. XXXI distinct, omnino. John.

(_f_) For example, as to the Incarnation, that passage in Virgil[AD]:
"Jam nova progenies caelo demittitur ab alto."

(_g_) As that passage from Ovid[AE], "Odero si potero: si non, invitus
amabo."

[The notes on the remaining paragraphs of the text are here omitted
owing to their length.]

...or philosophers, are said to have foretold any truth, it
certainly has weight in overcoming the vanity of the pagans; not,
however, in leading to the acceptance of their authority. For as
great as is the difference between the prediction of the coming
of Christ by the angels and the confession of the devils, so