← Back to Distinction 23

Dist. 23, Dubia

Book II: On the Creation of Things · Distinction 23

Textus Latinus
p. 548

## DUBIA CIRCA LITTERAM MAGISTRI.

Dub. I.

In parte ista sunt dubitationes circa litteram, et primo quaeritur de hoc quod dicit primo capitulo: Non esset homini laudabile bene vivere, si nemo male vivere suaderet. Sed contra: si enim hoc verum est1, tunc videtur, quod vita nostra in gloria laudabilis non erit, ubi nemo male vivere suadebit. — Item, esto quod diabolus nihil homini2 persuasisset, nihilominus mereri potuisset; sed si mereretur, esset laude dignus: ergo etc.

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod laus quaedam est, quae respicit dignitatem3 operis voluntarii, in quantum opus illud nobile est: et hoc posset esse in homine, etiamsi nullus ipsum tentasset. Quaedam autem est laus, quae non tantum respicit opus voluntarium, sed etiam opus strenuum et arduum, quod consistit in expugnatione adversarii et reportatione triumphi; et de hoc loquitur Apostolus, secundae ad Timotheum secundo4: Non coronabitur, nisi qui legitime certaverit. Et de hac laude Magister intelligit. — Et sic patent illa duo obiecta, quia procedunt de laude secundum primum modum.

Dub. II.

Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicitur: Gloriosius est non consentire peccato quam tentari non posse. Sed contra: Deus non potest tentari; homo vero sic: ergo gloriosior est homo quam Deus. — Item, in statu gloriae homo non poterit tentari; in statu viae potest: ergo gloriosior est status viae quam patriae; quod si verum est, gloriosior est miseria quam gloria.

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod verbum Magistri intelligendum est circa eum qui efficitur gloriosus5 ex merito suorum operum; et ideo non valet illud quod obiicit de Deo. — Item, intensio gloriae intelligenda est in verbo proposito non quantum ad praemium substantiale, sed quantum ad aliquam accidentalem laudem, qua laudatur vir iustus, Ecclesiastici trigesimo primo6: Qui potuit transgredi, et non est transgressus etc.; et ideo non valet illud quod obiicitur secundo.

Dub. III.

Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit, quod scientiam rerum creatarum homo non perdidit, et propterea in Scriptura de ea non eruditur. Utrumque enim videtur esse falsum. Constat enim, quod nos, qui sumus filii Adae, rerum naturas ignoramus et ignorantes nascimur nec nosse possumus, nisi cum magna difficultate discamus. — Similiter, secundum videtur esse falsum, quia in sacra Scriptura7 habetur de productione omnium rerum in operibus sex dierum, et qualiter productae sunt et qualiter etiam distinctae sunt.

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod etsi homo merito primi peccati excaecatus sit et factus sit ignorans tam in cognitione universitatis propter ipsum creatae, quam etiam in cognitione viae salutis suae; plus tamen excaecatus est in secundo quam in primo. Nam ad cognitionem naturalium rerum multum potest proficere proprio studio atque ingenio, sed in cognitione modi perveniendi ad vitam per se ipsum plus deficit, quam proficit, nisi divinae revelationis instructione dirigatur. Et propterea magis data est nobis Scriptura, divinitus8 et per Spiritum sanctum revelata, in cognitione fidei et morum, quam in cop. 549gnitione rerum naturalium, licet omnis veritas aliquo modo a Spiritu sancto esse dicatur. Et pro tanto intelligendum est verbum prius propositum a Magistro fuisse dictum.

Quod ergo obiicitur de amissione cognitionis, verum est, quod amisit habitum, non tamen amisit naturale iudicatorium9. — Ad illud vero quod obiicitur, quod Scriptura insinuat productionem rerum; dicendum, quod non determinat ibi rerum speciales naturas et causas; sed hoc explicat, quod sentit fides sana, videlicet divinam voluntatem omnium esse causam primam et summam, et omnia esse facta per Verbum10 et reparata per Verbum.

Dub. IV.

Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit, quod homo non habuit praescientiam eorum quae futura erant. Si enim hoc verum esset, cum nos multa praesciamus de futuris — et sancti Patres praesciverunt adventum Christi, et Prophetae similiter — videtur, quod Adam non fuit ita sapiens, sicut nos sumus hodie. Si tu dicas, quod hoc non est inconveniens propter gratuitam revelationem, quae in nobis est et Prophetis, ut aliquid sciamus, quod ignoravit Adam; obiicitur contra hoc: quia, sicut Sancti exponunt, Adam in sopore illo raptus est et ad caelestem curiam dicitur fuisse perductus; et hoc innuit textus11, quod statim post evigilationem prophetice locutus est: Hoc nunc os etc. Si ergo vere locutus est prophetice, praecognovit, quid significabat mulieris et viri coniunctio et mulieris de latere viri formatio. Sed primum significat Christi incarnationem; secundum, passionem: ergo praecognovit12 Christum incarnandum et Christum passurum; sed redemptio et reparatio praesupponit lapsum: ergo praecognovit Adam lapsum futurum et suum remedium.

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod Magister non loquitur de quibuscumque futuris, sed de his quae spectabant ad statum suum, utpote de lapsu et confirmatione. Confirmationem enim praescire non potuit, quia non erat mansurus; lapsum autem scire non debuit; et rationes supra13 assignatae sunt, cum hoc quaesitum fuit de Angelo.

Cum ergo obiicitur, quod praescivit incarnationem; dupliciter respondetur: uno modo, quod hoc falsum est; etsi enim sciret mulierem factam, ut coniungeretur sibi per coniugii Sacramentum, non tamen oportuit, quod sciret incarnationem et passionem, pro eo quod coniugium tempore innocentiae non significabat coniunctionem Christi et Ecclesiae quantum ad naturarum14 coniunctionem, sed per caritatem et dilectionem. — Alius est modus respondendi, quod sicut Ioseph praecognovit suum principatum, non tamen praecognovit suam venditionem, et hoc fuit antecedens ad illud15; sic Adam nosse potuit aliquid, quod spectabat ad hanc naturae exaltationem, sicut fuit Christi incarnatio, ita tamen, quod ignorabat posteritatis suae lapsum per suam praevaricationem, vel quia Deus non revelavit, vel quia ipse non pertractavit.

---

English Translation

## DOUBTS CONCERNING THE TEXT OF THE MASTER.

Doubt I.

In this part there are doubts concerning the text, and first it is asked about that which he says in the first chapter: It would not be praiseworthy for a man to live well, if no one were urging him to live badly. But on the contrary: for if this is true1, then it seems that our life in glory will not be praiseworthy, where no one will urge us to live badly. — Likewise, suppose that the devil had persuaded a man2 to nothing, nonetheless he could have merited; but if he merited, he would be worthy of praise: therefore, etc.

I respond: It must be said that there is a certain praise which regards the worthiness3 of a voluntary work, inasmuch as that work is noble: and this could exist in a man even if no one had tempted him. But there is a certain praise which regards not only a voluntary work, but also a strenuous and arduous work, which consists in the vanquishing of an adversary and the carrying-off of the triumph; and of this the Apostle speaks, in the second [letter] to Timothy, second [chapter]4: He will not be crowned, unless he has lawfully striven. And the Master understands [it] of this praise. — And thus those two objections are made plain, because they proceed concerning praise according to the first mode.

Doubt II.

Likewise it is asked about that which is said: It is more glorious not to consent to sin than to be unable to be tempted. But on the contrary: God cannot be tempted; but man can: therefore man is more glorious than God. — Likewise, in the state of glory a man will not be able to be tempted; in the state of the way he can: therefore the state of the way is more glorious than that of the fatherland; and if this is true, misery is more glorious than glory.

I respond: It must be said that the word of the Master must be understood concerning him who is made glorious5 from the merit of his own works; and therefore that which he objects concerning God does not hold. — Likewise, the intensity of glory is to be understood in the proposed statement not with respect to the substantial reward, but with respect to some accidental praise, by which a just man is praised, in Ecclesiasticus, thirty-first [chapter]6: Who could transgress, and has not transgressed, etc.; and therefore that which is objected in the second place does not hold.

Doubt III.

Likewise it is asked about that which he says, that man did not lose the knowledge of created things, and therefore he is not instructed concerning it in Scripture. For each [statement] seems to be false. For it is plain that we, who are the sons of Adam, are ignorant of the natures of things and are born ignorant and cannot know them, unless we learn with great difficulty. — Likewise, the second [statement] seems to be false, because in sacred Scripture7 there is [an account] concerning the production of all things in the works of the six days, and how they were produced and also how they were distinguished.

I respond: It must be said that although man, by the desert of the first sin, has been blinded and made ignorant both in the knowledge of the universe created on account of himself, and also in the knowledge of the way of his own salvation; nevertheless he has been more blinded in the second than in the first. For toward the knowledge of natural things he can advance much by his own study and natural endowment, but in the knowledge of the manner of arriving at life he by himself fails more than he advances, unless he is directed by the instruction of divine revelation. And therefore Scripture has rather been given to us, revealed divinely8 and through the Holy Spirit, in the knowledge of faith and morals, than in the knowledge of natural things, although all truth is in some manner said to be from the Holy Spirit. And to this extent it must be understood that the word proposed earlier by the Master was spoken.

That, therefore, which is objected concerning the loss of knowledge, it is true that he lost the habit, yet he did not lose the natural faculty of judgment9. — But to that which is objected, that Scripture intimates the production of things; it must be said that it does not there determine the special natures and causes of things; but it explains this, which sound faith holds, namely that the divine will is the first and highest cause of all things, and that all things were made through the Word10 and repaired through the Word.

Doubt IV.

Likewise it is asked about that which he says, that man did not have foreknowledge of those things which were to come. For if this were true, since we foreknow many things concerning the future — and the holy Fathers foreknew the coming of Christ, and the Prophets likewise — it seems that Adam was not as wise as we are today. If you say that this is not unfitting on account of the gratuitous revelation which is in us and in the Prophets, that we should know something which Adam was ignorant of; it is objected against this: that, as the Saints expound, Adam in that sleep was rapt and is said to have been led to the heavenly court; and the text intimates this11, that immediately after his awakening he spoke prophetically: This now is bone etc. If, therefore, he truly spoke prophetically, he foreknew what the joining of woman and man signified, and the formation of woman from the side of man. But the first signifies the incarnation of Christ; the second, the passion: therefore he foreknew12 that Christ was to be incarnate and that Christ was to suffer; but redemption and reparation presuppose the fall: therefore Adam foreknew his own future fall and its remedy.

I respond: It must be said that the Master does not speak of any whatsoever future things, but of those which pertained to his own state, such as the fall and the confirmation. For he could not foreknow the confirmation, because he was not going to remain; but he ought not to know the fall; and the reasons have been assigned above13, when this was asked concerning the Angel.

When, therefore, it is objected that he foreknew the incarnation; it is answered in two ways: in one way, that this is false; for although he knew that woman was made, in order that she might be joined to him through the Sacrament of marriage, nevertheless it was not necessary that he should know the incarnation and the passion, for the reason that marriage in the time of innocence did not signify the joining of Christ and the Church with respect to the joining of natures14, but through charity and love. — There is another way of responding, that just as Joseph foreknew his own princely rule, yet did not foreknow his own being-sold, and this was antecedent to that15; so Adam was able to know something which pertained to this exaltation of nature, such as the incarnation of Christ was, yet in such a way that he was ignorant of the fall of his posterity through his own transgression, either because God did not reveal it, or because he himself did not consider it.

---

Apparatus Criticus
  1. Codd. et edd., except. cod. cc et ed. 1, esset.
    The codices and editions, except codex cc and edition 1, read esset ("it would be").
  2. Vat. cum edd. 3, 4 mali. Post nihilominus supple cum cod. O homo.
    The Vatican [edition] with editions 3, 4 [reads] mali ("of evil"). After nihilominus supply, with codex O, homo ("man").
  3. Cod. A respicit voluntatem et dignitatem, cod. N respicit voluntatis dignitatem et operis.
    Codex A [reads] respicit voluntatem et dignitatem ("regards the will and the worthiness"); codex N [reads] respicit voluntatis dignitatem et operis ("regards the worthiness of the will and of the work").
  4. Vers. 5. Vide supra pag. 533, nota 5. — Paulo superius Vat. cum edd. 3, 4 suppressit tantum et etiam. — Hoc dubium solvunt S. Thom., hic circa lit.; Petr. a Tar., et Richard. a Med., hic circa lit.; Ægid. R., hic dub. lit. 1.
    Verse 5 [2 Tim. 2:5]. See above, p. 533, note 5. — A little earlier the Vatican [edition] with editions 3, 4 suppressed tantum and etiam. — This doubt is resolved by St. Thomas, here on the text; Peter of Tarentaise and Richard of Mediavilla, here on the text; Giles of Rome, here, doubt on the text 1.
  5. Vat. et edd. 3, 4 gloriosior.
    The Vatican [edition] and editions 3, 4 [read] gloriosior ("more glorious").
  6. Vers. 10. — Cfr. S. Thom., hic circa lit.; Ægid. R., hic dub. lit. 2.
    Verse 10 [Ecclus. 31:10]. — Cf. St. Thomas, here on the text; Giles of Rome, here, doubt on the text 2.
  7. Gen. 1, 1. seqq.
    Genesis 1:1 and following.
  8. Epist. II. Tim. 3, 16: Omnis scriptura, divinitus inspirata, utilis est ad docendum... ad erudiendum in iustitia. Cfr. II. Petr. 1, 20. seq. — Quomodo omnis veritas a Spiritu sancto esse dicatur, explicatum est I. Sent. d. 46. dub. 8.
    Second Letter to Timothy 3:16: All Scripture, divinely inspired, is useful for teaching... for instructing in justice. Cf. 2 Peter 1:20 and following. — In what manner all truth is said to be from the Holy Spirit has been explained in I Sent., d. 46, doubt 8.
  9. Vide infra d. 39. a. 1. q. 2. in fine.
    See below, d. 39, a. 1, q. 2, at the end.
  10. Ioan. 1, 3: Omnia per ipsum facta sunt. — Cfr. de hoc dub. S. Thom., hic circa lit.; Petr. a Tar., et Richard. a Med., hic circa lit.; Ægid. R., hic dub. lit. 3.
    John 1:3: All things were made through him. — On this doubt cf. St. Thomas, here on the text; Peter of Tarentaise and Richard of Mediavilla, here on the text; Giles of Rome, here, doubt on the text 3.
  11. Gen. 2, 23. — Verba Augustini de hac re invenies supra pag. 433, nota 10.
    Genesis 2:23. — The words of Augustine on this matter you will find above, p. 433, note 10.
  12. Vat. igitur post cognovit.
    The Vatican [edition reads] igitur ("therefore") after cognovit.
  13. Dist. 4. a. 2. q. 2.
    Distinction 4, a. 2, q. 2.
  14. Vat. cum edd. 3, 4 matrimonii.
    The Vatican [edition] with editions 3, 4 [reads] matrimonii ("of marriage").
  15. Gen. 37, 6. seqq. — Mox pro ad hanc naturae cod. aa ad humanae naturae. — Cfr. supra d. 4. a. 2. q. 2. ad 2. S. Thom., hic circa lit.; Petr. a Tar., hic circa lit.; Ægid. R., hic dub. lit. 4.
    Genesis 37:6 and following. — Presently, for ad hanc naturae codex aa [reads] ad humanae naturae. — Cf. above, d. 4, a. 2, q. 2, ad 2. St. Thomas, here on the text; Peter of Tarentaise, here on the text; Giles of Rome, here, doubt on the text 4. ---
← Dist. 23, Art. 2, Q. 3