Dist. 5
Book II: On the Creation of Things · Distinction 5
Distinctio V.
Cap. I. De confirmatione et conversione stantium, et aversione et lapsu cadentium.
« Post haec consideratio adducit inquirere, quales effecti sint, dum dividerentur aversione et conversione. Post creationem namque mox quidam conversi sunt ad Creatorem suum, quidam aversi. Converti ad Deum fuit ei caritate adhaerere, averti odio habere vel invidere. Invidiae namque mater est superbia, qua voluerunt se parificare Deo. — In conversis quasi in speculo relucere coepit Dei sapientia, qua illuminati sunt; aversi vero excaecati sunt. Et illi quidem conversi sunt et illuminati a Deo, gratia apposita. Isti vero sunt excaecati non immissione malitiae, sed desertione gratiae, a qua deserti sunt, non ita, quod prius dedita12 subtraheretur, sed quia nunquam est apposita, ut converterentur. Haec est ergo conversio et aversio, qua divisi sunt qui natura boni erant, ut sint alii supra illud bonum per iustitiam boni, alii illo corrupto per culpam mali. Conversio iustos fecit, et aversio iniustos. Utraque fuit voluntatis, et voluntas utrinque libertatis ».
Cap. II. De libero arbitrio breviter tangitur.
« Habebant enim omnes liberum arbitrium, quod est libera potestas et habilitas voluntatis rationalis. Poterant enim voluntate eligere quodlibet et ratione iudicare, id est discernere, in quibus constat liberum arbitrium. Nec creati sunt volentes averti vel converti, sed habiles ad volendum hoc vel illud; et post creationem spontanea voluntate alii elegerunt malum, alii bonum. Et ita discrevit Deus lucem a tenebris, sicut dicit Scriptura3, id est bonos Angelos a malis, et lucem appellavit diem, tenebras vero noctem, quia bonos Angelos gratia sua illuminavit, malos vero excaecavit ».
Cap. III. An aliquid datum fuerit stantibus, quo converterentur.
« Si autem quaeritur, utrum post creationem conversis aliquid collatum sit, per quod converterentur, id est, diligerent Deum; dicimus, quia est eis collata gratia cooperans, sine qua non potest proficere rationalis creatura ad meritum vitae. Cadere enim potest per se, sed proficere non potest sine gratia adiuvante ».
Cap. IV. Qua gratia indigebant Angeli, et qua non.
Non indigebat Angelus gratia, per quam iustificaretur, quia malus non erat, sed qua ad diligendum Deum perfecte et obediendum adiuvaretur. Operans quidem gratia dicitur, qua iustificatur impius, id est de impio fit pius, de malo bonus. Cooperans vero, qua iuvatur ad bene volendum efficaciter et Deum prae omnibus diligendum et ad operandum bonum et ad perseverandum in bono et huiusmodi, de quibus postea plenius agemus4. Data est ergo Angelis, qui perstiterunt, cooperans gratia, per quam conversi sunt, ut Deum perfecte diligerent. Conversi ergo sunt a bono, quod habebant, non perdito, ad maius bonum, quod non habebant; et est facta ista conversio per gratiam cooperantem libero arbitrio, quae gratia aliis, qui ceciderunt, apposita non fuit.
Cap. V. An lapsis sit imputanda aversio.
Ideoque a quibusdam dici solet, non esse imputandum illis qui aversi sunt et non conversi, quia sine gratia converti non poterant; sed illa non est eis data, nec culpa illorum fuit, quod non est data, quia in eis nulla culpa adhuc praecesserat. — Ad quod dici potest, quoniam quibus apposita est ipsa gratia, non fuit ex meritis eorum, alioquin iam non esset gratia5, si ex p. 144merito, quod esset ante gratiam, daretur. Quod vero aliis non est data, culpa eorum fuit, quia, cum stare possent, noluerunt, quousque gratia apponeretur, sicut alii perstiterunt, donec, illis cadentibus per superbiam, eis gratia est apposita. Aperte ergo cadentium culpa in hoc deprehendi potest, quia, licet sine gratia nequirent proficere, quam nondum acceperant, per id tamen, quod eis collatum erat in creatione, poterant non cadere, id est stare; quia nihil erat, quod ad casum eos compelleret, sed sua spontanea voluntate declinaverunt; quod si non fecissent, quod datum est aliis utique daretur et istis.
Cap. VI. Utrum beatitudinem, quam acceperunt in confirmatione stantes, meruerunt per aliquam tunc appositam gratiam.
Hic quaeri solet, utrum in ipsa confirmatione beati fuerunt Angeli, et an ipsam beatitudinem aliquo modo meruerint. — Quod in ipsa confirmatione beati fuerunt, plures contestantur auctoritates6, et ideo pro constanti habendum est. — Utrum vero per gratiam tunc sibi datam ipsam beatitudinem meruerint, ambiguum est. Quibusdam enim placet, quod eam meruerint per gratiam, quam in confirmatione perceperunt7, simulque in eis meritum et praemium fuisse dicunt, nec meritum praecessisse praemium tempore, sed causa. — Aliis autem videtur, quod beatitudinem, quam receperunt in confirmatione, per gratiam tunc appositam non meruerint, dicentes, tunc non fuisse eis collatam gratiam ad merendum, sed ad beate vivendum; nec tunc eis datum esse bonum, quo mererentur, sed quo feliciter fruerentur. Quod autem tunc in praemium acceperunt per obsequia nobis exhibita ex Dei obedientia et reverentia mereri dicunt; et ita praemium praecessit merita. Et hoc mihi magis placere fateor8.
Distinction V.
Cap. I. On the confirmation and conversion of those who stood, and the aversion and fall of those who fell.
« After these matters, the consideration leads us to inquire of what sort they were made, when they were divided by aversion and conversion. For after creation some were soon turned to their Creator, some turned away. To be turned to God was for him to cleave [to God] in charity; to be turned away was to hate or to envy. For the mother of envy is pride, by which they wished to make themselves equal to God. — In those turned [to God] the wisdom of God began to shine back as in a mirror, by which they were illumined; but those turned away were blinded. And those indeed were turned and illumined by God, grace having been applied. But these were blinded not by the infusion of malice, but by the desertion of grace, from which they were forsaken — not in such a way that what had first been bestowed12 was withdrawn, but because it was never applied, that they might be converted. This, then, is the conversion and aversion by which those who were good by nature were divided, so that some are above that good through the righteousness of good, others, that good being corrupted, through the fault of evil. Conversion made [them] just, and aversion [made them] unjust. Each was a matter of the will, and the will on both sides was a matter of liberty ».
Cap. II. Free choice is briefly touched upon.
« For they all had free choice, which is the free power and aptitude of the rational will. For they were able by will to choose anything and by reason to judge, that is, to discern — in which [two] free choice consists. Nor were they created willing to be turned away or turned [to God], but apt for willing this or that; and after creation, by spontaneous will some chose evil, others good. And thus God divided the light from the darkness, as Scripture says3, that is, the good Angels from the evil, and he called the light day, but the darkness night, because he illumined the good Angels with his grace, but blinded the evil ».
Cap. III. Whether something was given to those who stood, by which they might be converted.
« But if it is asked whether after creation something was conferred on those who were converted, by which they might be converted, that is, might love God: we say that there was conferred on them cooperating grace, without which the rational creature cannot advance to the merit of life. For it can fall of itself, but it cannot advance without assisting grace ».
Cap. IV. By what grace the Angels had need, and by what they did not.
The Angel did not need grace by which he might be justified, since he was not evil, but [grace] by which he might be assisted to love God perfectly and to obey. Operating grace, indeed, is that by which the impious is justified, that is, from impious is made pious, from evil good. But cooperating [grace is that] by which one is helped to will the good effectively and to love God above all things and to do good and to persevere in good and the like, of which we shall later treat more fully4. There was given, then, to the Angels who stood firm, cooperating grace, by which they were converted, that they might love God perfectly. They were therefore turned away from a good which they had, not by losing it, to a greater good which they did not have; and this conversion was made through grace cooperating with free choice — which grace was not applied to the others, who fell.
Cap. V. Whether the aversion is to be imputed to those who fell.
Therefore it is wont to be said by some that it is not to be imputed to those who were turned away and not converted, since without grace they could not be converted; but that grace was not given to them, nor was it their fault that it was not given, since in them no fault had yet preceded. — To which it can be said that, for those to whom that grace was applied, it was not from their merits — otherwise it would no longer be grace5, if it were given p. 144from a merit which would exist before grace. But that it was not given to the others was their fault, since, although they were able to stand, they were unwilling [to do so] until grace should be applied, just as the others stood firm until, those [first] falling through pride, grace was applied to them. Plainly, therefore, the fault of those who fell can be detected in this: that, although without grace they could not advance, which they had not yet received, yet through that which had been conferred on them in creation they were able not to fall, that is, to stand; since there was nothing which compelled them to the fall, but by their own spontaneous will they turned aside; and had they not done so, what was given to the others would certainly be given to these as well.
Cap. VI. Whether the beatitude which those who stood received in confirmation, they merited through some grace then applied.
Here it is wont to be asked whether in the confirmation itself the Angels were blessed, and whether they merited that beatitude in some way. — That in the confirmation itself they were blessed, several authorities attest6, and therefore it is to be held as certain. — But whether through the grace then given to them they merited that beatitude is ambiguous. For it pleases some that they merited it through the grace which they received7 in confirmation, and they say that in them merit and reward were simultaneous, and that merit did not precede reward in time, but in cause. — But to others it seems that the beatitude which they received in confirmation they did not merit through the grace then applied — saying that grace was then conferred on them not for meriting, but for living blessedly; nor was a good then given to them by which they might merit, but by which they might happily enjoy. But what they then received as reward, through the services rendered to us out of obedience and reverence toward God, they say is merited; and thus reward preceded merits. And I confess that this latter view pleases me more8.
- Cfr. Aristot., V. Metaph. text. 21. (IV. c. 16.). — Totum hoc cap. I. fere ad verbum ex Hugone, l. de Sacram. p. 5. c. 23. et Summa Sent. tr. 2. c. 2. exscriptum est; sequens cap. nec non plura alia ex eadem Sum. tr. 2. c. 3. sumpta sunt.Cf. Aristotle, Metaphysics V, text 21 (IV, c. 16). — This entire chapter I is copied almost word for word from Hugh [of St. Victor], On the Sacraments I, p. 5, c. 23, and the Summa Sententiarum tr. 2, c. 2; the following chapter, as well as several other things, are taken from the same Summa Sententiarum tr. 2, c. 3.
- Vat. sola habita, edd. 2, 6, 8 data. Paulo inferius post illud bonum edd. 1, 8 inserunt quod habebant. Deinde pro utrinque Vat. cum ceteris edd., exc. 1, utriusque; incongrue.The Vatican edition alone [reads] habita; editions 2, 6, 8 [read] data. A little below, after illud bonum ("that good") editions 1, 8 insert quod habebant ("which they had"). Then for utrinque ("on both sides") the Vatican edition, with the rest of the editions except 1, [reads] utriusque ("of each"); incongruously.
- Gen. 1, 4.Gen. 1:4.
- Vat. cum codd. B E et nonnullis edd. dicemus, scilicet in d. XXVI. et XXIX.The Vatican edition, with codices B E and several editions, [reads] dicemus ("we shall say"), namely in dist. XXVI and XXIX.
- Respicitur Rom. 11, 6.Reference is made to Rom. 11:6.
- Cod. Erf.: sicut August., XI. de Civ. Dei, c. 12, et XI. de Gen. c. 8, et libr. de Corrept. et gratia circa medium, et fere ubique secundum August., ubi loquitur de materia ista.The Erfurt codex [annotates]: as Augustine, On the City of God XI, c. 12, and On the Literal Meaning of Genesis XI, c. 8, and the book On Rebuke and Grace about the middle, and almost everywhere according to Augustine, where he speaks of this matter.
- Codd. B C E acceperunt.Codices B C E [read] acceperunt ("they received").
- Cod. Erf. annotat: Hic non tenetur Magister. — Nec [?]The Erfurt codex annotates: Here the Master is not followed. — Nor [?] (the printed p.144 footnote breaks off at Nec at the L→R column edge; full continuation to be confirmed in the d.10 600 dpi polish pass).