Dist. 34, Divisio Textus
Book II: On the Creation of Things · Distinction 34
## COMMENTARIUS IN DISTINCTIONEM XXXIV.
De peccato actuali secundum eius causalitatem.
Post praedicta de peccato actuali etc.
DIVISIO TEXTUS.
Ista totalis pars secundi libri, in qua Magister agit de lapsu hominis, divisa fuit in tres partes1, secundum quod tripliciter contingit considerare corruptionem peccati. Duabus partibus terminatis, in quibus Magister egit de peccato, quo persona corrumpit naturam, et iterum de peccato, quo natura corrumpit personam, utpote de originali, sequitur hic tertia pars, in qua agitur de peccato, in quo persona corrumpit se, hoc est de peccato actuali, et haec durat usque in finem libri. Dividitur autem haec pars in duas. In prima determinat de peccato sive de malo secundum id quod est. Secundo vero, qualiter a voluntate habeat malum sive peccatum committi, infra distinctione trigesima octava: Post praedicta de voluntate etc. Prima pars habet duas. In prima determinat de peccato sive malo secundum eius causalitatem. Secundo vero, secundum eius quidditatem, infra distinctione trigesima quinta: Post haec videndum est, quid sit peccatum.
Prima pars continet praesentem distinctionem et dividitur in duas. In prima agit Magister de malo quantum ad causam originalem. In secunda de malo quantum ad subiectum sive causam efficientem, ibi: Ostensa origine mali etc. Prima pars habet tres partes. In prima aperit suam intentionem in generali. In secunda vero ostendit, quod malum ortum habet a causa bona, ibi: Causa et origo etc. In tertia vero, quod est a voluntate libera, ibi: Mala autem voluntas etc.
Similiter secunda pars principalis habet tres. In prima ostendit, quod malum est in bono, confirmans hoc auctoritate Augustini. Secundo vero elicit quoddam corollarium, scilicet quod in his contrariis fallit regula dialecticorum, ibi: Ideoque in his contrariis etc. In tertia vero et ultima removet quoddam dubium, ibi: Ad hoc autem, quod dictum est etc. — Et sic supposito, quod malum sit, duo manifestat Magister de malo, scilicet a quo sit et in quo.
TRACTATIO QUAESTIONUM.
Ad intelligentiam huius partis secundum duo, quae Magister determinat in littera, incidit hic quaestio circa duo principaliter.
Primo quaeritur, a quo sit malum tanquam ab originali principio.
Secundo, in quo sit tanquam in subiecto.
Circa primum quaeruntur tria.
Primo quaeritur, utrum malum sit a bono, vel a malo.
Secundo, utrum sit a bono ut efficiente, vel deficiente.
Tertio, utrum sit ab intentione, vel praeter intentionem.
---
## COMMENTARY ON DISTINCTION XXXIV.
On actual sin according to its causality.
After the foregoing concerning actual sin etc.
DIVISION OF THE TEXT.
This total part of the second book, in which the Master treats of the fall of man, was divided into three parts1, according to the threefold way in which it is possible to consider the corruption of sin. The two parts now being finished, in which the Master treated of the sin by which the person corrupts the nature, and again of the sin by which the nature corrupts the person, namely of original sin, there follows here the third part, in which there is treated the sin in which the person corrupts itself, that is, actual sin; and this lasts until the end of the book. Now this part is divided into two. In the first he determines concerning sin or evil according to that which it is. But secondly, how it comes about that evil or sin is committed by the will, below in the thirty-eighth distinction: After the foregoing concerning the will etc. The first part has two. In the first he determines concerning sin or evil according to its causality. But secondly, according to its quiddity, below in the thirty-fifth distinction: After these things it must be seen what sin is.
The first part contains the present distinction and is divided into two. In the first the Master treats of evil as to its original cause. In the second, of evil as to its subject or efficient cause, there: The origin of evil having been shown etc. The first part has three parts. In the first he opens his intention in general. But in the second he shows that evil has its rise from a good cause, there: The cause and origin etc. But in the third, that it is from the free will, there: But an evil will etc.
Likewise the second principal part has three. In the first he shows that evil is in a good, confirming this by the authority of Augustine. But secondly he draws out a certain corollary, namely that in these contraries the rule of the dialecticians fails, there: And therefore in these contraries etc. But in the third and last he removes a certain doubt, there: But to this, which has been said etc. — And thus, evil being supposed to be, the Master manifests two things concerning evil, namely from what it is and in what it is.
TREATMENT OF THE QUESTIONS.
For the understanding of this part, according to the two things which the Master determines in the text, there here arises a question principally concerning two things.
First it is asked, from what evil comes as from its original principle.
Secondly, in what it is as in its subject.
Concerning the first, three things are asked.
First it is asked, whether evil is from a good, or from an evil.
Secondly, whether it is from a good as from an efficient [cause], or from a deficient [one].
Thirdly, whether it is from intention, or beside intention.
---
- Supra d. 21. divis. textus.Above, distinction 21, division of the text. ---