Bonaventure — Opera Omnia

Dist. 43, Art. 2, Q. 2

Book II: On the Creation of Things · Distinction 43

Textus Latinus

p. 988

Articulus II. De eodem peccato quoad conditiones proprias.

Quaestio II. Utrum peccatum in Spiritum sanctum sit irremissibile.

Secundo quaeritur de istius peccati irremissibilitate. Et quod istud peccatum sit irremissibile, ostenditur.

1. Matthaei duodecimo¹: Spiritus blasphemiae non remittetur²; et post: Qui dixerit verbum contra Spiritum sanctum, non remittetur, nec in hoc saeculo nec in futuro; sed Christus nullo modo potest mentiri: ergo illud peccatum nullo modo potest remitti.

2. Item, Glossa³ super dictum locum: Blasphemia remittetur; spiritus autem blasphemiae non remittetur, nec in hoc saeculo nec in futuro.

p. 989

3. Item, Ieremiae decimo octavo⁴: Desperavimus, post cogitationes nostras ibimus; et post subiungitur: Tu autem noli orare pro populo isto, quia non exaudiam te: si ergo pro peccato remissibili Dominus vult exorari, et nolebat exorari propter peccatum desperationis; ergo videtur, quod peccatum desperationis sit irremissibile. Pari ratione concluditur de qualibet huius peccati specie.

4. Item, nullum peccatum remitti potest, nisi de quo quis potest subire poenitentiam et postulare veniam; sed peccatum in Spiritum sanctum non est huiusmodi: ergo etc. Maior manifesta est; minor probatur per illud Augustini, qui dicit in libro de Sermone Domini in monte⁵: « Tanta est labes huius peccati, ut deprecandi humilitatem subire non possit ».

5. Item, impoenitentia est species huius peccati et annexa aliis speciebus⁶; si ergo impoenitentia directe opponitur ipsi veniae et poenitentiae, ergo videtur, quod simpliciter privet veniam et remissionem: videtur ergo, quod hoc peccatum sit irremissibile.

Sed contra: 1. Super illud Psalmi⁷: Conversi sunt in profundum maris; Glossa: « Id est, eos qui erant desperatissimi »: ergo si hoc est peccatum, quod maxime elongat a venia, et illud omnino remittitur; videtur, quod et omnia alia.

2. Item, Augustinus de Verbis Domini⁸: « Ista impoenitentia vel cor impoenitens, quamdiu quis in hac carne vivit, non potest iudicari; de nullo enim desperandum est, quamdiu patientia Dei eum ad poenitentiam adducit ». Sed de eo qui peccat peccato irremissibili, desperandum est: ergo videtur, quod peccans peccato in Spiritum sanctum non peccat irremissibiliter.

3. Item, peccatum in Spiritum sanctum non aufert homini statum viatoris; sed quamdiu homo est in statu viatoris, habet vertibilitatem liberi arbitrii; et quamdiu hoc habet, potest Deo⁹ reconciliari et a peccato liberari: ergo videtur, quod peccatum in Spiritum sanctum possibile sit remitti.

4. Item, potentior est gratia et virtus in bonum, quam sit peccatum in malum¹⁰; sed nulla virtus reddit hominem ex suo actu impossibilem ad peccandum, nec poenitentia nec alia: ergo videtur, quod nulla culpa reddit hominem impossibilem ad resurgendum. Sed non resurgit homo a peccato, nisi remittatur peccatum: ergo non solum istud peccati genus, sed etiam quodlibet aliud est remissibile.

5. Item, si peccatum in Spiritum sanctum dicitur irremissibile, aut hoc est per privationem actus remissionis, aut per privationem dispositionis, aut per privationem possibilitatis. Si per privationem actus: ergo quodlibet peccatum, quod non remittitur, debet dici irremissibile: ergo quodlibet peccati genus isto modo irremissibile dicetur. Si per privationem dispositionis: ergo cum omne peccatum mortale reddat hominem ineptum ad remissionem propter Dei offensam et contemptum, videtur ergo, quod omne debeat dici irremissibile. Si propter privationem possibilitatis; contra: aut hoc est, quia Deus non potest infundere gratiam; aut hoc est, quia iste non potest gratiam recipere. Sed primum est plane falsum, similiter et secundum, quia iste habet arbitrii libertatem: non igitur videtur, quod aliquo modo illud peccatum debeat dici irremissibile.

Est igitur quaestio, si dicitur irremissibile, quomodo dicatur et qualiter.

Conclusio

> Peccatum in Spiritum sanctum, communiter acceptum, dicitur irremissibile, quia non tantum repugnat gratiae, sed etiam dispositioni ad gratiam et veniam suscipiendam, quin tamen potentiam se salvandi privet, sicut impoenitentia finalis.

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod, sicut Magister in littera¹¹ innuit, quorundam opinio fuit, quod peccatum in Spiritum sanctum diceretur irremissibile, « quia vix et raro et difficulter dimittitur ». Alii vero dixerunt, quod illud peccatum dicitur irremissibile, « quia nullo modo remitti habet, pro eo quod tali peccato peccans digne poenitere non potest ». — Uterque autem istorum modorum dicendi conveniens est et verus, nec unus repugnat alteri, si recte intelligantur.

p. 990

Sicut enim remissibile dicitur dupliciter: uno modo remissibile dicit aptitudinem, alio modo remissibile dicit consuetudinem; sic et irremissibile dupliciter potest dici: uno modo, ut dicatur irremissibile, id est ineptum sive impossibile ad remittendum; alio modo, ut dicatur irremissibile, quod est inconsuetum remitti¹².

Utroque horum modorum peccatum in Spiritum sanctum potest dici irremissibile; nam omne peccatum in Spiritum sanctum vel est impoenitentia, vel habet impoenitentiam annexam. Impoenitentia autem dicitur duobus modis, sicut et perseverantia: uno modo dicitur perseverantia propositum perseverandi; alio modo dicitur perseverantia continua permanentia in bono usque in finem. Et primo modo perseverantia est in qualibet virtute; secundo modo perseverantia includit gratiam finalem¹³. Sic et impoenitentia dicitur dupliciter: uno modo dicitur impoenitentia propositum non poenitendi; alio modo dicitur impoenitentia continua permanentia in malo usque ad diem extremum inclusive. — Et secundum istum modum peccatum in Spiritum sanctum, quod claudit in se impoenitentiam, dupliciter potest dici: uno modo, prout claudit in se impoenitentiam, quae quidem est finalis persistentia in malo; et sic dicitur irremissibile, quia non potest remitti, sicut finalis gratia non potest perdi. Sed hoc modo peccare peccato¹⁴ in Spiritum sanctum nemini attribuendum est usque ad illud instans, in quo possit dici de isto, quod finaliter sit impoenitens. Et secundum hunc modum currit una praedictarum opinionum, et ita valde stricte accipit peccatum in Spiritum sanctum. — Alio modo dicitur peccatum in Spiritum sanctum, prout claudit in se impoenitentiam, id est propositum non poenitendi; hoc modo dicitur irremissibile, id est inconsuetum remitti. Quamvis enim non sit impossibile ad remissionem, quia tale propositum mutari potest; raro tamen et vix remittitur, quia tale propositum claudit¹⁵ viam ad gratiam et impedit Spiritus sancti ingressum. Illud enim, quod gratiam introducit et quod ad gratiam disponit de congruo, est voluntas recedendi a peccato; et ideo, cum voluntas faciem suam obfirmavit¹⁶ ad oppositum, nisi fiat ei specialis vocationis donum et adiutorium, non pervenitur ad remissionis beneficium. Quoniam igitur alia peccatorum genera, etsi privent bonam voluntatem et iustitiam, non tamen reddunt voluntatem rebellem et repugnantem contra vocationem divinam; hinc est, quod si¹⁷ nunquam remittantur propter negligentiam peccatoris, vel propter praeoccupationem mortis, non dicuntur esse irremissibilia.

Patet igitur, quare peccatum illud dicitur irremissibile magis quam alia peccatorum genera, scilicet pro eo, quod non tantum repugnat gratiae, sed etiam dispositioni ad veniam et gratiam suscipiendam. Patet etiam, quomodo dicatur irremissibile; quia, communiter loquendo, non privat potentiam, sed dispositionem; stricte autem accipiendo, potentiam privat; sed hoc modo non dicitur peccare aliquis in Spiritum sanctum, quamdiu vivit in hac vita.

Ad argumenta: Et per hoc patet responsio ad rationes, quae inducuntur ad utramque partem; ad eas potissime, quae inducuntur ad secundam partem, quae videlicet ostendunt, quod peccatum illud non dicitur irremissibile, eo quod reddat hominem impossibilem ad veniam, quamdiu est in vita ista; et quia verum concludunt, ideo concedendae sunt.

Ultima tamen ratio videtur ostendere, quod nullo modo debeat dici irremissibile; sed iam manifesta est per ea quae dicta sunt, quia in aliis peccatis mortalibus non sic est privatio ad remissionem, sicut in hoc peccato. Quamvis enim alia peccata tollant iustitiam, non tamen auferunt propositum redeundi ad iustitiam. Fere enim omnes qui peccant, emendare proponunt. Hoc autem peccati genus, in quantum peccatum est, tollit iustitiam; in quantum vero tale peccatum est, quod habet annexam impoenitentiam, aufert homini propositum redeundi ad gratiam; et ideo irremissibile dicitur, quia privat dispositionem ad bonum.

Ad 1, 2. Ad illud autem quod primo obiicitur in contrarium de auctoritate Domini in Matthaeo, et etiam de Glossa; dicendum, quod tam textus quam Glossa intelligi habet quantum ad privationem remissionis secundum consuetudinem, non secundum possibilitatem et aptitudinem; unde quod Dominus comminatur, quod illud peccatum non remittetur, hoc intelligendum est, non quia remitti non possit, sed quia Deus paucis consuevit remittere. — Vel dicendum, sicut dicit Augustinus¹⁸, quod intelligitur de peccato in Spiritum sanctum, secundum quod includit impoenitentiam finalem, hoc est, in quo quis perseverat usque ad mortem.

p. 991

Ad 3. Ad illud quod tertio obiicitur de verbo Ieremiae, quod Deus nolebat orari pro desperatis; dicendum, quod hoc non erat, quia nullo modo possent ad bonum converti vel redire; hoc enim potuissent, si Deus vellet eos specialiter visitare; sed quia ipsi non merebantur, et Deus occulto suo iudicio nolebat eis manum misericordiae¹⁹ ampliare. Hinc est, quod praevidens et suum iudicium et eorum impoenitentiam, hoc Prophetae praedicebat; et ita ex hoc non habetur, quod illud peccatum non posset remitti, sed quia illud illis nolebat Deus remittere, et quod illi finaliter in impoenitentia remansuri erant, quamvis possent ab ea discedere.

Ad 4. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod tanta est huius peccati labes, quod poenitere non possit; dicendum, quod Augustinus²⁰ illud verbum retractat et explanat, hoc non esse dictum per privationem omnimodae possibilitatis, cum Deus convertat desperatissimos, sed per privationem facilitatis; unde non solummodo consuevit aliquid dici impossibile, quod nullo modo potest fieri, sed etiam quod difficulter fit²¹.

Ad 5. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod impoenitentia est species huius peccati; iam patet responsio, quia dupliciter dicitur impoenitentia, sicut dictum est; et prout impoenitentia dicitur propositum non poenitendi, non reddit hominem impossibilem ad veniam, quia potest ab isto proposito desistere; et illo proposito desistente, potest aliud propositum illi succedere, et per illud ad veniam pervenire.

---

English Translation

Article II. On the same sin as to its proper conditions.

Question II. Whether the sin against the Holy Spirit is unforgivable.

Secondly, inquiry is made concerning the unforgivableness of this sin. And that this sin is unforgivable is shown.

1. Matthew, chapter twelve¹: The blasphemy of the spirit shall not be forgiven²; and afterward: Whoever shall speak a word against the Holy Spirit shall not be forgiven, neither in this world nor in the world to come; but Christ can in no way lie: therefore that sin can in no way be forgiven.

2. Likewise, the Gloss³ on the said passage: Blasphemy shall be forgiven; but the blasphemy of the spirit shall not be forgiven, neither in this world nor in the world to come.

3. Likewise, Jeremiah, chapter eighteen⁴: We have despaired, after our own thoughts we will go; and afterward it is added: But do not pray for this people, for I will not hear you: if, therefore, the Lord wills to be entreated for a forgivable sin, and was unwilling to be entreated on account of the sin of despair; therefore it seems that the sin of despair is unforgivable. By parity of reasoning the same is concluded concerning every species of this sin.

4. Likewise, no sin can be forgiven except one for which a person can undergo penance and ask for pardon; but the sin against the Holy Spirit is not of this kind: therefore etc. The major is manifest; the minor is proved by that saying of Augustine, who says in the book On the Lord's Sermon on the Mount⁵: « So great is the stain of this sin that it cannot submit to the humility of imploring ».

5. Likewise, impenitence is a species of this sin and is annexed to its other species⁶; if, therefore, impenitence is directly opposed to pardon and penance itself, therefore it seems that it simply deprives one of pardon and remission: therefore it seems that this sin is unforgivable.

On the contrary: 1. Upon that text of the Psalm⁷: They were turned into the depth of the sea; the Gloss: « That is, those who were most desperate »: therefore if this is the sin which most removes one from pardon, and even that is altogether forgiven; it seems that all the others are too.

2. Likewise, Augustine On the Words of the Lord⁸: « This impenitence, or impenitent heart, so long as one lives in this flesh, cannot be judged; for one must despair of no one, so long as the patience of God leads him to penance ». But concerning him who sins by an unforgivable sin, one must despair: therefore it seems that he who sins by the sin against the Holy Spirit does not sin unforgivably.

3. Likewise, the sin against the Holy Spirit does not take from a man the state of wayfarer; but so long as a man is in the state of wayfarer, he has the changeableness of free choice; and so long as he has this, he can be reconciled to God⁹ and freed from sin: therefore it seems that the sin against the Holy Spirit can possibly be forgiven.

4. Likewise, grace and virtue are more powerful toward the good than sin is toward evil¹⁰; but no virtue renders a man by his own act incapable of sinning, neither penance nor any other: therefore it seems that no fault renders a man incapable of rising again. But a man does not rise again from sin unless the sin be forgiven: therefore not only that kind of sin, but also any other, is forgivable.

5. Likewise, if the sin against the Holy Spirit is called unforgivable, either this is by privation of the act of remission, or by privation of disposition, or by privation of possibility. If by privation of the act: then any sin that is not forgiven ought to be called unforgivable: therefore any kind of sin would be called unforgivable in this manner. If by privation of disposition: then since every mortal sin renders a man unfit for remission on account of the offense and contempt of God, it seems therefore that every sin ought to be called unforgivable. If by privation of possibility; on the contrary: either this is because God cannot infuse grace; or this is because that man cannot receive grace. But the first is plainly false, and likewise the second, since that man has freedom of choice: it does not therefore seem that in any way that sin ought to be called unforgivable.

There is, therefore, a question: if it is called unforgivable, in what way and how it is so called.

Conclusion

> The sin against the Holy Spirit, taken in a general sense, is called unforgivable because it not only resists grace, but also resists the disposition for receiving grace and pardon, yet without depriving one of the power of saving oneself, as does final impenitence.

I respond: It must be said that, as the Master suggests in the text¹¹, it was the opinion of some that the sin against the Holy Spirit was called unforgivable « because it is forgiven scarcely and rarely and with difficulty ». But others said that that sin is called unforgivable « because it can in no way be forgiven, in that he who sins by such a sin cannot worthily repent ». — Now each of these ways of speaking is fitting and true, nor does the one conflict with the other, if they are rightly understood.

For just as the forgivable is spoken of in two ways — in one way the forgivable means aptitude, in another way the forgivable means custom — so too the unforgivable can be spoken of in two ways: in one way, so that it is called unforgivable, that is, unfit or impossible to be forgiven; in another way, so that it is called unforgivable, which is unaccustomed to be forgiven¹².

In both of these ways the sin against the Holy Spirit can be called unforgivable; for every sin against the Holy Spirit either is impenitence, or has impenitence annexed. Now impenitence is spoken of in two ways, just as is perseverance: in one way perseverance is called the purpose of persevering; in another way perseverance is called continued remaining in the good unto the end. And in the first way perseverance is in any virtue; in the second way perseverance includes final grace¹³. So too impenitence is spoken of in two ways: in one way impenitence is called the purpose of not repenting; in another way impenitence is called continued remaining in evil up to and including the last day. — And according to this latter way the sin against the Holy Spirit, which encloses impenitence within itself, can be spoken of in two ways: in one way, inasmuch as it encloses within itself the impenitence which is the final persistence in evil; and thus it is called unforgivable, because it cannot be forgiven, just as final grace cannot be lost. But to sin by sin¹⁴ against the Holy Spirit in this manner is to be attributed to no one until that instant in which it can be said of him that he is finally impenitent. And according to this manner runs one of the aforesaid opinions, and thus it takes the sin against the Holy Spirit very strictly. — In another way the sin against the Holy Spirit is spoken of, inasmuch as it encloses within itself impenitence, that is, the purpose of not repenting; in this manner it is called unforgivable, that is, unaccustomed to be forgiven. For although it is not impossible to be forgiven, since such a purpose can be changed; nevertheless it is rarely and scarcely forgiven, because such a purpose closes¹⁵ the way to grace and impedes the entrance of the Holy Spirit. For that which introduces grace and which disposes toward grace congruously is the will to withdraw from sin; and therefore, when the will has hardened its face¹⁶ toward the opposite, unless the gift and help of a special calling be given to it, the benefit of remission is not attained. Since, therefore, the other kinds of sins, even if they deprive one of good will and justice, nevertheless do not render the will rebellious and resistant against the divine calling; hence it is that if¹⁷ they are never forgiven, on account of the negligence of the sinner, or on account of the forestalling of death, they are not called unforgivable.

It is clear, therefore, why that sin is called unforgivable more than the other kinds of sins, namely because it not only resists grace, but also the disposition for receiving pardon and grace. It is also clear in what way it is called unforgivable; because, generally speaking, it does not deprive one of the power, but of the disposition; but strictly speaking, it deprives one of the power; but in this manner one is not said to sin against the Holy Spirit, so long as he lives in this life.

To the arguments: And by this is clear the response to the reasonings which are brought forward on both sides; chiefly to those which are brought forward for the second side, which show, namely, that that sin is not called unforgivable on the ground that it renders a man incapable of pardon while he is in this life; and because they conclude truly, they are therefore to be granted.

Nevertheless the last reasoning seems to show that it ought in no way to be called unforgivable; but this is already manifest from the things that have been said, because in other mortal sins there is not such a privation of remission as there is in this sin. For although other sins take away justice, nevertheless they do not take away the purpose of returning to justice. For nearly all who sin propose to amend. But this kind of sin, inasmuch as it is sin, takes away justice; inasmuch as it is such a sin, which has impenitence annexed, it takes from a man the purpose of returning to grace; and therefore it is called unforgivable, because it deprives one of the disposition toward the good.

To 1, 2. As to that which is first objected to the contrary from the authority of the Lord in Matthew, and also from the Gloss; it must be said that both the text and the Gloss are to be understood as referring to the privation of remission according to custom, not according to possibility and aptitude; hence, that the Lord threatens that that sin shall not be forgiven, this is to be understood, not because it cannot be forgiven, but because God is accustomed to forgive it for few. — Or it must be said, as Augustine says¹⁸, that it is understood of the sin against the Holy Spirit insofar as it includes final impenitence, that is, that in which one perseveres unto death.

To 3. As to that which is thirdly objected concerning the word of Jeremiah, that God was unwilling to be prayed to for the desperate; it must be said that this was not because they could in no way be converted or return to the good; for this they could have done, if God had willed to visit them specially; but because they themselves did not merit it, and God by his hidden judgment was unwilling to extend to them the hand of his mercy¹⁹. Hence it is that, foreseeing both his own judgment and their impenitence, he was foretelling this to the Prophet; and so from this it is not had that that sin could not be forgiven, but that God was unwilling to forgive it to them, and that they were finally going to remain in impenitence, although they could have departed from it.

To 4. As to that which is objected, that so great is the stain of this sin that one cannot repent; it must be said that Augustine²⁰ retracts and explains that word, that this was not said by the privation of every kind of possibility, since God converts the most desperate, but by the privation of facility; hence not only is something accustomed to be called impossible which can in no way come to be, but also that which comes to be with difficulty²¹.

To 5. As to that which is objected, that impenitence is a species of this sin; the response is already clear, because impenitence is spoken of in two ways, as has been said; and inasmuch as impenitence is called the purpose of not repenting, it does not render a man incapable of pardon, since he can desist from that purpose; and when that purpose is abandoned, another purpose can succeed it for him, and through it he can attain to pardon.

---

Apparatus Criticus

Matth. 26, 41: Spiritus quidem promptus est, caro autem infirma. — Paulo inferius pro immo est cod. T substituit immo etiam.
Matthew 26:41: The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak. — A little below, for immo est codex T substitutes immo etiam.
Vers. 31: Spiritus autem blasphemia non remittetur. Ad quem locum Alex. Hal., S. p. II. q. 156. m. 3. annotat: Quod dicitur in Matth. 12. spiritus blasphemiae in nostra translatione, secundum Chrysostomum dicitur blasphemia spiritus. — Alter Script. loc. est ibid. v. 32.
Verse 31: But the blasphemy of the spirit shall not be forgiven. On which passage Alexander of Hales, Summa, part II, q. 156, m. 3, notes: That which is said in Matthew 12, "the blasphemy of the spirit" in our translation, according to Chrysostom is called "the blasphemy of the spirit." — The other Scripture passage is ibid., v. 32.
Quae hic ut verba Glossae adducuntur (etiam a S. Thoma, hic circa lit.) inveniuntur in Evang. Matth. 12, 31. 32, ubi sic legitur: « Ideo dico vobis: omne peccatum et blasphemia remittetur hominibus, spiritus autem blasphemia non remittetur. Et quicumque dixerit... non remittetur ei, neque in hoc saeculo neque in futuro ». Sententia huic similis habetur Marc. 3, 28. nec non Luc. 12, 10. Glossae, quas Strabus et Lyranus super hos locos exhibent, aliter sonant ac verba a Bonav. hic allata, quamvis quoad sensum cum eis conveniunt. Cfr. August., serm. 71. (alias 11. de Verbis Domini) de verbis Evang. Matth. 12, 32. sive de Blasphemia in Spiritum S. c. 12. n. 20 (vide supra pag. 983, nota 1.), et etiam Beda, in Matth. 12, 31. 32.
What are here adduced as the words of the Gloss (also by St. Thomas, here on the text) are found in the Gospel of Matthew 12:31–32, where it reads thus: « Therefore I say to you: every sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven to men, but the blasphemy of the spirit shall not be forgiven. And whoever shall say... it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world nor in the world to come ». A judgment similar to this is found at Mark 3:28, and also at Luke 12:10. The Glosses which Strabus and Lyranus present on these passages sound otherwise than the words here adduced by Bonaventure, although in sense they agree with them. Cf. Augustine, sermon 71 (otherwise 11, On the Words of the Lord) on the words of the Gospel of Matthew 12:32, or On Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, c. 12, n. 20 (see above, p. 983, note 1), and also Bede, on Matthew 12:31–32.
Vers. 12. — Alter Script. locus, de quo hic praedicatur, quod priori subiungatur, in vero ei praecedit; habetur enim Ier. 7, 16.
Verse 12. — The other Scripture passage, of which it is here stated that it is subjoined to the first, in fact precedes it; for it is found at Jeremiah 7:16.
Libr. I. c. 22. n. 74. — De maiori, in qua pro remitti potest edd. substituunt remittitur, cfr. supra pag. 843, nota 8. In minori plurimi codd. perperam omittunt non.
Book I, c. 22, n. 74. — On the major, in which for remitti potest the editions substitute remittitur, cf. above, p. 843, note 8. In the minor very many codices wrongly omit non.
Vide infra a. 3. q. 1. seq. — Cod. T ante speciebus repetit peccati.
See below, a. 3, q. 1, following. — Codex T before speciebus repeats peccati.
Psalm. 67, 23. — Glossa est ordinaria et sumta ex August., Enarrat. in hunc Ps. n. 31. Haec etiam habetur hic in lit. Magistri, circa medium. Verbum Glossa deest in codd. et primis edd.
Psalm 67:23. — The Gloss is the ordinary one and is taken from Augustine, Enarration on this Psalm, n. 31. This is also found here in the text of the Master, near the middle. The word Gloss is absent in the codices and the early editions.
Serm. 71. (alias 11. de Verbis Domini) de verbis Evang. Matth. 12, 32. sive de Blasphemia in Spiritum S. c. 13. n. 21. Cfr. hic lit. Magistri, circa medium. In fine respicitur Rom. 2, 4.
Sermon 71 (otherwise 11, On the Words of the Lord) on the words of the Gospel of Matthew 12:32, or On Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, c. 13, n. 21. Cf. here the text of the Master, near the middle. At the end Romans 2:4 is referred to.
Cod. T subiicit servire.
Codex T subjoins servire [to serve].
Vide supra pag. 920, nota 1. — Paulo inferius in prima conclus. Vat. post reddit hominem adiicit ex suo actu.
See above, p. 920, note 1. — A little below, in the first conclusion, the Vatican edition after reddit hominem adds ex suo actu [by his own act].
Hic circa medium. — Ratio, qua secunda opinio fulcitur, ex Hieronymo delibata est, ut ex lit. Magistri patet. — Vat. ante Magister inserit dicit et post in littera subiicit et. Aliquanto inferius pro recte intelligantur cod. T recte intelligitur.
Here, near the middle. — The reason on which the second opinion is supported is drawn from Jerome, as is clear from the text of the Master. — The Vatican edition before Magister inserts dicit, and after in littera subjoins et. Somewhat below, for recte intelligantur codex T reads recte intelligitur.
Cfr. Aristot., V. Phys. text. 20. (c. 2.) et XI. Metaph. c. 11. (X. c. 12.), ubi immobile simili modo distinguitur.
Cf. Aristotle, Physics V, text 20 (c. 2) and Metaphysics XI, c. 11 (X, c. 12), where the immovable is distinguished in a similar way.
Vide August., de Dono persever. c. 1. n. 1. seqq.
See Augustine, On the Gift of Perseverance, c. 1, n. 1, following.
Cod. T peccatum.
Codex T reads peccatum.
Cod. T addit in se.
Codex T adds in se [in itself].
Locutio obfirmare faciem sumta est ex Lev. 17, 10, quae et recurrit Ezech. 4, 3. — Codd. I P V W firmavit, cod. B omnino firmavit, cod. ee confirmavit. Paulo inferius pro pervenitur in Vat. exhibetur pervenit, et subinde pro remissionis beneficium in codd. C F O R S T V Y ee remissionem beneficii, cod. bb remunerationem beneficii.
The phrase obfirmare faciem (to harden the face) is taken from Leviticus 17:10, and it also recurs at Ezekiel 4:3. — Codices I P V W read firmavit, codex B omnino firmavit, codex ee confirmavit. A little below, for pervenitur the Vatican edition presents pervenit, and thereupon for remissionis beneficium codices C F O R S T V Y ee read remissionem beneficii, codex bb remunerationem beneficii.
Codd. L O etsi. Paulo ante plurimi codd. et primae edd. voculae hinc praefigunt et [i. e. etiam]; paulo inferius post non Vat. et edd. 3, 4 adiiciunt tamen.
Codices L O read etsi. A little before, very many codices and the early editions prefix to the little word hinc an et [i.e. etiam, also]; a little below, after non the Vatican edition and editions 3, 4 add tamen.
Libr. I. de Serm. Domini in monte, c. 22. n. 74. seq. Cfr. hic lit. Magistri. — Paulo superius pro quod Dominus comminatur codd. I P V W Z quod Dominus dicit in Evangelio.
Book I, On the Lord's Sermon on the Mount, c. 22, n. 74, following. Cf. here the text of the Master. — A little above, for quod Dominus comminatur codices I P V W Z read quod Dominus dicit in Evangelio [that the Lord says in the Gospel].
Cod. T annectit suae. Paulo inferius pro Prophetae praedicebat ed. 3 Prophetae praedicebant, Vat. Propheta praedicabat. In fine solut. pro discedere codd. F T recedere.
Codex T annexes suae [his (mercy)]. A little below, for Prophetae praedicebat edition 3 reads Prophetae praedicebant, the Vatican edition Propheta praedicabat. At the end of the solution, for discedere codices F T read recedere.
Libr. I. Retract. c. 19. n. 7. Cfr. hic lit. Magistri. — Paulo ante pro poenitere Vat. et edd. 2, 3, 4 poeniteri. In nostra lectione supple: aliquem.
Book I, Retractations, c. 19, n. 7. Cf. here the text of the Master. — A little before, for poenitere the Vatican edition and editions 2, 3, 4 read poeniteri. In our reading supply: aliquem [someone].
Aristot., I. de Caelo et mundo, text. 111. (c. 11.): Impossibile autem dicitur dupliciter: aut enim simpliciter, quia non verum est dicere quod factum utique erit (ὅτι γένοιτ᾽ ἄν), aut quia non facile neque cito aut bene. — Pro sed etiam codd. H I W ee sed secundum. Paulo superius pro desperatissimos cod. Z sceleratissimos.
Aristotle, On the Heavens I, text 111 (c. 11): The impossible is spoken of in two ways: either simply, because it is not true to say that it will ever have come to be (ὅτι γένοιτ᾽ ἄν), or because it is not easy nor quick nor good. — For sed etiam codices H I W ee read sed secundum. A little above, for desperatissimos codex Z reads sceleratissimos.

← Dist. 43, Art. 2, Q. 1 Dist. 43, Art. 3, Q. 1→