Bonaventure

## COMMENTARIUS IN DISTINCTIONEM XXX.

Utrum et quid sit peccatum originale.

In superioribus insinuatum est etc.

DIVISIO TEXTUS.

Pars ista, in qua Magister determinat de hominis lapsu, divisa fuit¹ in tres partes secundum triplicem differentiam corruptionis peccati, in quarum una persona corrumpit naturam, in altera vero natura personam, in tertia vero persona corrumpit se ipsam. Et prima quidem consistit in peccato primi parentis, secunda in peccato originali et tertia in peccato actuali. Prima igitur parte determinata, aggreditur hic Magister partem secundam.

Dividitur autem pars ista in partes quatuor. In quarum prima determinat, quid sit originale peccatum. In secunda vero, qualiter traducatur, infra distinctione trigesima prima: Nunc superest investigare etc. In tertia vero, qualiter deleatur, infra distinctione trigesima secunda: Quoniam supra dictum est, peccatum originale esse vitium etc. In quarta vero determinat, utrum peccatum originale multiplicetur et intendatur per peccata proximorum² parentum, infra distinctione trigesima tertia: Praedictis adiiciendum est etc.

Prima pars, quae continet praesentem distinctionem, dividitur in partes tres. In prima ponit partem prooemialem. In secunda determinat propositum principale, ibi: Hic primo videndum est etc. In tertia determinat quandam incidentem dubitationem de veritate humanae naturae, ibi: Ad hoc autem, quod diximus, in Adam fuisse etc. Prima et tertia³ parte remanente indivisa, media pars dividitur in tres. In prima inquirit, utrum originale peccatum sit. In secunda⁴, dato quod sit, inquirit, utrum sit poena, vel culpa, ibi: Quod diligenter investigandum est, quid sit etc. In tertia inquirit, utrum sit concupiscentia, vel alia culpa, ibi: Nunc superest videre, quid sit illud peccatum etc. Harum autem partium subdivisiones in littera planae sunt.

TRACTATIO QUAESTIONUM.

Ad intelligentiam autem huius partis secundum tria, quae determinat Magister in littera, incidit hic quaestio circa tria.

Primo namque quaeritur de originalis peccati entitate.

Secundo, de quidditate.

Tertio et ultimo, de veritate humanae naturae.

Quantum ad primum articulum quaeruntur duo.

Primo quaeritur, utrum corruptio, quae est in natura humana, insit ei ex primo ortu suae conditionis, vel ex merito primae transgressionis.

Secundo, dato quod merito transgressionis⁵, est quaestio, utrum propter peccatum Adae humana natura sit corrupta poenaliter tantum, an etiam poenaliter et culpabiliter.

---

Commentary on Distinction XXX.

Whether there is original sin, and what it is.

In what precedes it was intimated etc.

Division of the text.

This part, in which the Master determines concerning the fall of man, was divided¹ into three parts according to the threefold difference of the corruption of sin: in one of these the person corrupts the nature, in another the nature [corrupts] the person, and in the third the person corrupts itself. And the first indeed consists in the sin of the first parent, the second in original sin, and the third in actual sin. Therefore, the first part having been determined, the Master here approaches the second part.

Now this part is divided into four parts. In the first of these he determines what original sin is. In the second, how it is transmitted, below in the thirty-first distinction: Now it remains to investigate etc. In the third, how it is blotted out, below in the thirty-second distinction: Since it was said above that original sin is a defect etc. In the fourth he determines whether original sin is multiplied and intensified through the sins of one's near² parents, below in the thirty-third distinction: To the aforesaid it must be added etc.

The first part, which contains the present distinction, is divided into three parts. In the first he sets down the prefatory part. In the second he determines the principal matter proposed, there: Here first it must be seen etc. In the third he determines a certain incidental doubt concerning the truth of human nature, there: But to this which we have said, that in Adam etc. The first and third³ parts remaining undivided, the middle part is divided into three. In the first he inquires whether original sin exists. In the second⁴, granted that it exists, he inquires whether it is a penalty or a fault, there: Which must be diligently investigated, what it is etc. In the third he inquires whether it is concupiscence or some other fault, there: Now it remains to see what that sin is etc. But the subdivisions of these parts are plain in the text.

Treatment of the questions.

For the understanding of this part according to the three [matters] which the Master determines in the text, there arises here a question regarding three [things].

For first it is asked concerning the entity of original sin.

Second, concerning its quiddity.

Third and last, concerning the truth of human nature.

As to the first article, two [questions] are asked.

First it is asked whether the corruption which is in human nature is in it from the first arising of its condition, or from the merit of the first transgression.

Second, granted that [it is in it] by the merit of the transgression⁵, the question is whether on account of the sin of Adam human nature was corrupted penally only, or also penally and culpably.

---