Dist. 11, Divisio Textus
Book III: On the Incarnation of the Word · Distinction 11
## COMMENTARIUS IN DISTINCTIONEM XI. ### De communicatione idiomatum, quae dicunt aliquam defectibilitatem.comm-xref
Deinde, si quaeritur, utrum praedestinatiop242-comm1 etc.
DIVISIO TEXTUS.
Supra ostendit Magister, qualiter conveniunt Christo illa idiomata, quae sonare videntur in complementum et dignitatem. In hac vero parte inquirit de his quae dicunt aliquam defectibilitatem; talia autem sunt, quae notant inceptionem et significant habere esse post non-esse. Talia autem sunt in triplici differentia: quia quaedam important inchoationem in esse implicite et ratione connotati, ut vocabulum praedestinandi; quaedam implicite, sed ratione principalis significati, ut verbum creandi; quaedam explicite et ratione sui primi significati, sicut verbum incipiendi. Ideo pars ista habet partes tres. In quarum prima inquirit, utrum praedestinatio dicatur in Christo de natura, an de personap242-comm2. In secunda vero inquirit, utrum Christus sit creatura, in principio distinctionis undecimae: Solet etiam quaeri, utrum debeat simpliciter dici etc. In tertia vero quaerit, utrum ille homo aliquando inceperit, an semper fuerit, ibi: Post praedicta quaeritur etc.
Prima autem et ultima parte remanente indi-p. 243visa, media pars dividitur in tres. In quarum prima proponit quaestionem et determinat. In secunda vero per auctoritates Sanctorum confirmat, ibi: Qui Christum vel Dei Filium non esse factum etc. Tertio vero dissolvit argumentationem sophisticam, quae quidem videtur esse contraria veritati, et hoc ibi: Etsi ergo Christus secundum hominem dicitur creatura etc.
TRACTATIO QUAESTIONUM.
Ad intelligentiam autem huius partis incidit hic quaestio circa duo. Primo quantum ad Christi praedestinationem. Secundo vero quaeritur de his quae videntur circa Christum ponere inceptionem.
Circa primum quaeruntur tria per comparationem ad praedestinationem nostram.
Primum est, utrum praedestinatio Christi sit nostrae praedestinationi conformis.
Secundum est, utrum sit nostrae praedestinationis forma exemplaris.
Tertium est, utrum respectu nostrae praedestinationis sit in eap243-2 ratio causalitatis.
---
## COMMENTARY ON DISTINCTION XI. ### On the communication of idioms which state some defectibility.comm-xref
Next, if it be asked whether predestinationp242-comm1 etc.
DIVISION OF THE TEXT.
Above the Master showed how those idioms belong to Christ which seem to ring of completeness and dignity. But in this part he inquires concerning those which state some defectibility; and such are those which mark an inception and signify having being after non-being. And such are of a threefold difference: for some import inchoation in being implicitly and by reason of what is connoted, as the word "to-predestine"; some implicitly, but by reason of the principal thing signified, as the word "to-create"; some explicitly and by reason of their primary signification, as the word "to-begin." Therefore this part has three parts. In the first of these he inquires whether predestination is said in Christ of the nature or of the personp242-comm2. In the second he inquires whether Christ is a creature, at the beginning of the eleventh distinction: It is also wont to be asked whether it ought to be said simply, etc. In the third he asks whether that man at some time began, or always existed, there: After the foregoing it is asked, etc.
But the first and last parts remaining undi-p. 243vided, the middle part is divided into three. In the first of these he proposes the question and determines it. In the second he confirms it by the authorities of the Saints, there: He who [shows that] Christ, or the Son of God, is not made, etc. In the third he resolves the sophistical argumentation, which indeed seems to be contrary to the truth, and this there: Although, therefore, Christ is said to be a creature according to the man, etc.
TREATMENT OF THE QUESTIONS.
For the understanding of this part there falls here a question concerning two matters. First, as regards Christ's predestination. Second, it is asked concerning those things which seem to posit an inception in Christ.
Concerning the first, three things are asked by comparison to our predestination.
The first is, whether Christ's predestination is conformable to our predestination.
The second is, whether it is the exemplary form of our predestination.
The third is, whether, with respect to our predestination, there is in itp243-2 an account of causality.
---
- Cfr. de hoc dubio Alex. Hal., S. p. III. q. 10. m. 6. a. 1; B. Albert., hic. a. 16.Cf. on this matter Alexander of Hales, Summa, part III, q. 10, m. 6, a. 1; Blessed Albert, here, a. 16.
- Pro his verbis, quae sumta sunt ex lit. Magistri, d. X. c. 3, sola Vat. substituit Solet etiam quaeri, utrum debeat simpliciter dici etc.For these words, which are taken from the text of the Master, d. X, c. 3, the Vatican edition alone substitutes It is also wont to be asked whether it ought to be said simply, etc.
- Supra d. X. c. 3. Ibi autem in divisione textus illud capitulum explicite tribuitur distinctioni X. In commentario autem de eodem agitur in hac dist.Above, d. X, c. 3. There, however, in the division of the text that chapter is explicitly attributed to distinction X. But in the commentary the same matter is treated in this distinction.
- Non pauci codd. parum recte in eo.Not a few codices, less correctly, [read] in eo ("in him").