Dist. 13, Art. 2, Q. 1
Book III: On the Incarnation of the Word · Distinction 13
Articulus II. De gratia capitis.
Consequenter quaeritur de gratia capitis, de qua quaeruntur tria.
Primo quaeritur de ipsa quantum ad essentiam, quid sit.
Secundo quantum ad differentiam, utrum differat ab alia gratia.
Tertio quantum ad influentiam, utrum redundet in totam Ecclesiam.
Quaestio I. Utrum gratia capitis sit quid creatum, vel increatum.
Circa primum sic proceditur et quaeritur, quid sit gratia capitis secundum essentiam, utrum videlicet sit quid creatum, vel increatum. Et quod sit quid creatum, videtur.
1. Omnis gratia, quae coepit esse in Christo, est quid creatum; sed gratia capitis coepit esse in Christo, quia Christus coepit esse caput, secundum quod dicitur ad Ephesios primop283-7: Ipsum dedit caput super omnem Ecclesiam: ergo etc.
2. Item, omnis gratia, quae est in Christo, secundum quod homo, est gratia creata; sed gratia capitis est huiusmodi: ergo etc. Maior patet; minor probatur per hoc, quod gratia capitis inest Christo, secundum quod caput; sed unius naturae sunt caput et membra: ergop283-8 Christus est caput secundum humanam naturam: ergo etc.
3. Item, illa est gratia capitis, de cuius plenitudine accepimusp283-9; sed de gratia Christi creata accepimus gratiam pro gratia — ipse enim omnibus meruit et pro omnibus satisfecit — ergo etc.
4. Item, illa est gratia capitis, secundum quam attenditur universitas sensuum — in Christo enim sicut in capite omnes sensus reperiunturp284-1 — sed gratia, secundum quam attenditur diversitas sensuum et secundum quam colliguntur in Christo, est gratia creata: ergo etc.
Sed contra: 1. Nihil creatum influit motum et sensum gratiae in membrap284-2; sed gratia capitis est, secundum quam est influentia motus et sensus in membra Christi: ergo gratia capitis non potest esse quid creatum.
2. Item, nihil creatum unum numerop284-3 est omnino incircumscriptum; sed Christus, in quantum est caput, est a quolibet suorum membrorum indivisus: ergo non potest esse caput secundum aliquid creatum. Si ergo caput est secundum aliquam gratiam, videtur, quod illa sit gratia increata.
3. Item, caput est membrorum principium et origo; sed Christus non potest esse animarum principium nisi secundum divinam naturam: ergo est caput secundum illam: ergo si caput dicit quid increatum, videtur similiter, quod gratia capitis quid increatum sit secundum suam essentiam.
4. Item, caput est simul cum membris, vel antecedit membra: ergo gratia capitis gratiam membrorum vel praecedit, vel concomitatur; sed gratia Christi creata non antecessitp284-4 gratiam membrorum — natura enim humana in Christo non prius fuit, quam esset in multis Sanctis, sed longe post — ergo gratia capitis non potest esse gratia creata.
Conclusio.
Gratia capitis ratione conformitatis naturae et influxus per modum praeparantis, aut merentis competit Christo ratione humanae naturae et dicit quid creatum; ratione vero principii et influxus per modum efficientis dicit quid increatum.
Respondeo: Ad praedictorum intelligentiam est notandum, quod caput in spiritualibus transumtive dicitur a capite in corporalibus; «omnes autem transferentes secundum aliquam similitudinem transferuntp284-5»: et ideo caput in spiritualibus dicitur secundum concomitantiam ad aliquam proprietatem capitis materialis. In capite autem materiali haec tria reperimus, scilicet quod est membris conforme, est membrorum principium, est etiam influxivum sensus et motusp284-6. Et propterea in ipso reperiuntur omnes sensus perfectiori modo quam in aliis membris. — Omnes autem has proprietates est in Christo reperire respectu bonorum; et ideo valde rationabiliter sancta Scripturap284-7 dicit, Christum esse caput Ecclesiae. — Sed prima proprietas, scilicet conformitas, competit ei ratione humanae naturae. Unde Augustinus super Ioannemp284-8: «Unius naturae sunt vitis et palmites. Propter quod, cum Deus esset, cuius naturae non sumus, factus est homo, ut in illo esset vitis humana natura, cuius et nos esse palmites possemus»; omnino enim idem est de capite quod de vite intelligendum.
Secunda autem proprietas, scilicet principiandi, competit ratione divinae naturae, secundum quod est omnium principium. Unde ad Colossenses primop284-9: Ipse caput corporis Ecclesiae, qui est principium etc.; ibi Glossa: «Qui est principium secundum divinitatem, id est fundator Ecclesiae, quia omnes iusti, qui ab Abel usque ad ultimum iustum generantur, virtute divinitatis illuminantur».
Tertia vero proprietas, scilicet influendi motum et sensum, competit ei ratione divinitatis et ratione humanitatis. Dupliciter enim contingit sensum et motum gratiae influere: aut per modum praeparantis, aut per modum impartientis. Si per modum praeparantis, sic est ipsius Christi ratione humanae naturae, in qua passus est propter nos et patiendo satisfecit et removit inimicitias et disposuit ad suscipiendam gratiam perfectamp284-10. Si per modum impartientis et conferentis, sic est ipsius Christi ratione divinae naturae, qui «solus Deus est, qui illuminat pias mentes», solus est, qui baptizat interius, pro eo quod «mens nostra immediate ab ipsa Veritate formatur», sicut saepe dicit Augustinusp284-11. Et ita influere per modum praeparantis est Christi hominis, per modum impartientis est Christi Dei. — Vel per alia verba, et in idem redit, influere per modum merentis, Christi hominis; per modum efficientis, Christi Dei; vel influere quantum ad remissionem poenae, Christi hominis, quantum ad remissionem culpae, Christi Dei. Et sic influentia uno modo respicit Christum secundum naturam creatamp285-1, alio modo secundum naturam increatam. —
Si ergo gratia capitis dicitur illa gratia, secundum quam Christus habet influere motum et sensum in membra; restat hoc esse ponendum, quod gratia capitis uno modo nominat gratiam increatam, alio etiam modo nominat non tantum increatam, sed etiam creatam, sicut ostendunt rationes ad primam partem; et ideo sunt concedendae.
Ad argumenta: Ad 1. Ad illud vero quod obiicitur, quod non potest esse gratia creata, quia non possetp285-2 influere; iam patet responsio, quia, quamvis non possit influere effective et causative, potest tamen influere meritorie et dispositive secundum naturam humanam.
Ad 2. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod Christus, secundum quod caput, est indivisus; dicendum, quod est unio per unitatem naturae, et est unio per fidem et dilectionem. Dicendum est igitur, quod unio Christi ad corpus Ecclesiae est per fidem et dilectionem. Cum ergo dicitur, quod caput est indivisum a membris; dicendum, quod indivisio non privat distantiam localem sive separationem corporum, sed separationem et disconvenientiam mentium et affectionum. Et ideo ex hoc non ponitur, quod Christus, secundum quod caput, sit incircumscriptus, quia idem potest esse in uno loco tantum, et tamen per cognitionem et amorem in cordibus diversorum. Unde ad Ephesios tertiop285-3: Habitare Christum per fidem in cordibus nostris.
Ad 3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod caput est membrorum principium; dicendum, quod ut caput sit principium quantum ad esse naturae, hoc est de veritatep285-4 capitis et expressa proprietate; nec hanc est reperire in Christo secundum humanam naturam, sed secundum divinam, ut praedictum est supra. — Posset tamen dici aliquo modo Christus principium membrorum suorum quantum ad esse gratiae etiam secundum humanam naturam, quia nunquam aliquis fuit gratiam assecutus, nisi haberet Christum in corde ut fundamentum, quod collocatur per fidem. Fundamentum enim aliud nemo potest in membris Christi ponere praeter illud quod positum est, quod est Christus Iesusp285-5, et sine hoc fundamento nemo potuit habere gratiam, quia nunquam fuit alicui salus sine fide Mediatoris. Et hoc est quod dicitur ad Colossenses primop285-6: Qui est principium etc.; Glossa: «Secundum humanitatem dici potest principium Ecclesiae, quia super fidem humanitatis eius Ecclesia fundata est».
Ad 4. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod gratia capitis, vel concomitatur, vel praecedit; dicendum, quod sicut dictum estp285-7 de unione, quod caput spirituale non oportet uniri materialiter et naturaliter, sed spiritualiter per cognitionem et amorem; sic etiam intelligendum est de antecessione. Unde ad hoc, quod Christus sit caput iustorum praecedentium, non oportuit, quod comitaretur re, sed fide; et sic utique fuit, quia fides Christi praecessit in cordibus salvandorum. — Et sic patet, quod capitis ratio et gratia similiter quantum ad perfectam similitudinem respicit in Christo aliquid increatum; respicit etiam aliquid creatum, ita quod ad perfectam rationem capitis intelligendam necesse est utrumque concurrere.
I. Ex ipsa s. Scriptura constat, Christum esse caput Ecclesiae; quod communiter intelligitur de tota omnino Ecclesia secundum totius temporis decursum et triplicem eiusdem statum i. e. prout est militans, patiens et triumphans. — Triplicem analogiam inter caput naturale et mysticum refert hic S. Bonav., scilicet quatenus caput est conforme membris, eorum principium atque influens sensum et motum. Paulo aliter S. Thom. in Sum. (III. q. 8. a. 1.) eandem analogiam considerat tripliciter: secundum ordinem, ut prima pars hominis, incipiendo a superiori; secundum perfectionem, quia in capite vigent omnes sensus; secundum virtutem, quia influit motum et sensum in membra. Idem autem in Comment. (hic q. 2. a. 1.) quatuor notat similitudines, scilicet quoad dignitatem triplicem, quoad influxum in membra, quoad directionem aliorum membrorum, quoad conformitatem naturae respectu eorundem. — Observat autem Alex. Hal. (S. p. III. q. 12. m. 2. a. 1. § 1.), quod hoc loco «propria ratione dicitur caput per rationem influentiae... quatenus Christus in Ecclesiam influit sensum et motum spiritualiter, sensum quidem influit per fidem, motum vero per amorem». Idem plures alias graves quaestiones de gratia capitis habet, quae a S. Bonav. non tractantur. — Licet Christus etiam secundum divinam naturam possit dici caput Ecclesiae, tamen, proprie loquendo, est caput secundum humanam naturam (Alex. Hal., loc. cit. § 2; S. Thom., hic loc. cit.), scilicet quatenus Christus per humanam naturam rationem capitis implet; unde praepositio secundum accipitur specificative, non reduplicative, ut supra d. 10. a. 2. q. I. in scholio dictum est.
II. Quoad solutionem ipsius quaestionis, utrum gratia capitis consistat in sola gratia unionis, an in sola gratia habituali, an in utraque, et quomodo; fuit quaedam differentia opinandi vel dicendi inter doctores; qui tamen nunc satis videntur convenire in hoc, quod gratia capitis proprie et essentialiter sit ipsa gratia p. 286 habitualis, sed prout connotat gratiam unionis, vel, ut alii loquuntur, ita ut radicaliter praeexigatur gratia unionis sive personalis (cfr. infra q. 2. ad 3. i. et d. 20. a. I. q. 4.).
III. Alex. Hal., loc. cit. m. 1. a. 1. — S. Thom., hic q. 3. a. 1; S. loc. cit. a. 5. — B. Albert., hic a. 1. — Petr. a Tar., hic q. 3. a. 2. — Richard. a Med., hic a. 3. q. I. — Durand., de hac et seqq. qq. hic q. 2. — Dionys. Carth., hic q. 4. — Biel, hic q. unica in fine.
---
Article II. On the grace of the Head.
Next the grace of the Head is inquired into, concerning which three things are asked.
First it is asked of it with respect to essence, what it is.
Second, with respect to difference, whether it differs from another grace.
Third, with respect to influence, whether it overflows into the whole Church.
Question I. Whether the grace of the Head is something created or uncreated.
Concerning the first, one proceeds thus, and it is asked, what the grace of the Head is according to essence, namely whether it is something created or uncreated. And that it is something created seems [the case].
1. Every grace which began to be in Christ is something created; but the grace of the Head began to be in Christ, since Christ began to be Head, according to what is said in Ephesians, chapter onep283-7: He gave Him as Head over the whole Church: therefore etc.
2. Likewise, every grace which is in Christ, insofar as He is man, is a created grace; but the grace of the Head is of this kind: therefore etc. The major is evident; the minor is proved by this, that the grace of the Head belongs to Christ insofar as He is Head; but head and members are of one nature: thereforep283-8 Christ is Head according to His human nature: therefore etc.
3. Likewise, that is the grace of the Head of whose fullness we have receivedp283-9; but of the created grace of Christ we have received grace for grace — for He merited for all and made satisfaction for all — therefore etc.
4. Likewise, that is the grace of the Head according to which the totality of the senses is regarded — for in Christ, as in the head, all the senses are foundp284-1 — but the grace according to which the diversity of the senses is regarded, and according to which they are gathered together in Christ, is a created grace: therefore etc.
On the contrary: 1. Nothing created infuses the motion and sensation of grace into the membersp284-2; but the grace of the Head is that according to which there is an influence of motion and sensation into the members of Christ: therefore the grace of the Head cannot be something created.
2. Likewise, nothing created and one in numberp284-3 is altogether uncircumscribed; but Christ, insofar as He is Head, is undivided from each of His members: therefore He cannot be Head according to something created. If, therefore, He is Head according to some grace, it seems that that grace is uncreated.
3. Likewise, the head is the principle and origin of the members; but Christ cannot be the principle of souls except according to His divine nature: therefore He is Head according to it: therefore if "head" signifies something uncreated, it seems likewise that the grace of the Head is something uncreated according to its essence.
4. Likewise, the head is either simultaneous with the members, or precedes the members: therefore the grace of the Head either precedes or accompanies the grace of the members; but the created grace of Christ did not precedep284-4 the grace of the members — for the human nature in Christ did not exist prior to its existing in many of the Saints, but long afterward — therefore the grace of the Head cannot be a created grace.
Conclusion.
The grace of the Head, by reason of conformity of nature and of influx by way of preparing or meriting, belongs to Christ by reason of His human nature and signifies something created; but by reason of being a principle and of influx by way of efficiency, it signifies something uncreated.
I respond: For the understanding of what has been said, it must be noted that "head" in spiritual things is said by transference from "head" in corporeal things; "for all who transfer [a term] transfer it according to some likenessp284-5": and so "head" in spiritual things is said according to a concomitance with some property of the material head. Now in the material head we find these three things, namely that it is conformed to the members, is the principle of the members, and is also that which infuses sensation and motionp284-6. And therefore in it all the senses are found in a more perfect manner than in the other members. — Now all these properties are to be found in Christ with respect to the good; and therefore very reasonably does Holy Scripturep284-7 say that Christ is the Head of the Church. — But the first property, namely conformity, belongs to Him by reason of His human nature. Hence Augustine, on Johnp284-8: «The vine and the branches are of one nature. On account of which, since He was God, of whose nature we are not, He was made man, so that in Him the human nature might be the vine, of which we too could be the branches»; for entirely the same is to be understood of the head as of the vine.
But the second property, namely being a principle, belongs to Him by reason of His divine nature, according as He is the principle of all things. Hence in Colossians, chapter onep284-9: He is the Head of the body, the Church, who is the principle etc.; there the Gloss: «Who is the principle according to divinity, that is, the founder of the Church, since all the just, who are begotten from Abel to the last just one, are illumined by the power of the divinity».
But the third property, namely the infusing of motion and sensation, belongs to Him by reason of the divinity and by reason of the humanity. For grace happens to infuse sensation and motion in two ways: either by way of preparing, or by way of imparting. If by way of preparing, then it is Christ's own by reason of His human nature, in which He suffered for us, and by suffering made satisfaction, and removed enmities, and disposed [us] to receive perfect gracep284-10. If by way of imparting and conferring, then it is Christ's own by reason of His divine nature, who «alone is God, who illumines devout minds», He alone it is who baptizes interiorly, in that «our mind is formed immediately by Truth itself», as Augustine often saysp284-11. And so to infuse by way of preparing belongs to Christ as man, by way of imparting belongs to Christ as God. — Or, in other words, and it comes to the same, to infuse by way of meriting belongs to Christ as man; by way of efficiency, to Christ as God; or to infuse with respect to the remission of punishment belongs to Christ as man, with respect to the remission of guilt, to Christ as God. And thus the influence in one way regards Christ according to created naturep285-1, in another way according to uncreated nature. —
If, therefore, the grace of the Head is said to be that grace according to which Christ has [the power] to infuse motion and sensation into the members; it remains that this must be laid down, that the grace of the Head in one way names an uncreated grace, and in another way names not only an uncreated but also a created grace, as the arguments for the first part show; and therefore they are to be conceded.
To the arguments: To 1. As for what is objected, that it cannot be a created grace, because it could notp285-2 infuse; the response is already clear, since, although it cannot infuse effectively and causally, it can nevertheless infuse meritoriously and dispositively according to the human nature.
To 2. As for what is objected, that Christ, insofar as He is Head, is undivided; it must be said that there is a union by unity of nature, and there is a union by faith and love. It must therefore be said that the union of Christ to the body of the Church is by faith and love. When, then, it is said that the head is undivided from the members; it must be said that the lack of division does not exclude local distance or separation of bodies, but the separation and disagreement of minds and affections. And therefore from this it is not posited that Christ, insofar as He is Head, is uncircumscribed, since the same can be in one place only, and yet through knowledge and love in the hearts of diverse persons. Hence Ephesians, chapter threep285-3: That Christ may dwell through faith in your hearts.
To 3. As for what is objected, that the head is the principle of the members; it must be said that, for the head to be a principle with respect to the being of nature, this belongs to the truthp285-4 of the head and to its express property; nor is this to be found in Christ according to the human nature, but according to the divine, as was said above. — Yet Christ could in some way be said to be the principle of His members with respect to the being of grace even according to the human nature, since no one ever attained grace unless he had Christ in his heart as a foundation, which is laid by faith. For no one can lay any other foundation in the members of Christ than that which is laid, which is Christ Jesusp285-5, and without this foundation no one could have grace, since there was never salvation for anyone without faith in the Mediator. And this is what is said in Colossians, chapter onep285-6: Who is the principle etc.; the Gloss: «According to His humanity He can be called the principle of the Church, since the Church is founded upon the faith of His humanity».
To 4. As for what is objected, that the grace of the Head either accompanies or precedes; it must be said that, just as was saidp285-7 of the union, that the spiritual head need not be united materially and naturally, but spiritually through knowledge and love; so too it must be understood concerning precedence. Hence, for Christ to be the Head of the just who preceded, it was not required that He accompany them in reality, but in faith; and so indeed it was, since the faith of Christ went before in the hearts of those to be saved. — And so it is evident that the character of the Head and likewise the grace, with respect to the perfect likeness, regards in Christ something uncreated; it also regards something created, so that for understanding the perfect character of the Head it is necessary that both concur.
I. From Holy Scripture itself it is established that Christ is the Head of the Church; which is commonly understood of the whole Church without exception, according to the course of all time and the threefold state of the same, i.e. as it is militant, suffering, and triumphant. — St. Bonaventure here reports a threefold analogy between the natural and the mystical head, namely insofar as the head is conformed to the members, their principle, and that which infuses sensation and motion. Somewhat differently St. Thomas in the Summa (III, q. 8, a. 1) considers the same analogy in three ways: according to order, as it is the first part of man, beginning from above; according to perfection, since in the head all the senses flourish; according to power, since it infuses motion and sensation into the members. The same author, however, in his Commentary (here, q. 2, a. 1) notes four likenesses, namely as to the threefold dignity, as to the influx into the members, as to the direction of the other members, as to the conformity of nature with respect to them. — Alexander of Hales (Summa, pt. III, q. 12, m. 2, a. 1, § 1) observes that in this place «He is called Head by a proper account through the account of influence... insofar as Christ infuses sensation and motion into the Church spiritually — sensation indeed He infuses through faith, but motion through love». The same author has several other weighty questions on the grace of the Head, which are not treated by St. Bonaventure. — Although Christ can also be called the Head of the Church according to His divine nature, nevertheless, properly speaking, He is Head according to His human nature (Alexander of Hales, in the place cited, § 2; St. Thomas, here in the place cited), namely insofar as Christ through His human nature fulfills the account of Head; whence the preposition according to is taken specificatively, not reduplicatively, as was said above in d. 10, a. 2, q. I, in the scholion.
II. As to the solution of the question itself — whether the grace of the Head consists in the grace of union alone, or in habitual grace alone, or in both, and in what manner — there was a certain difference of opinion or of expression among the doctors; who nevertheless now seem to agree sufficiently in this, that the grace of the Head is properly and essentially the very habitual grace, but as it connotes the grace of union, or, as others say, in such a way that the grace of union or personal grace is radically presupposed (cf. below, q. 2, ad 3, i, and d. 20, a. I, q. 4).
III. Alexander of Hales, in the place cited, m. 1, a. 1. — St. Thomas, here, q. 3, a. 1; S., in the place cited, a. 5. — Bl. Albert, here, a. 1. — Peter of Tarentaise, here, q. 3, a. 2. — Richard of Mediavilla, here, a. 3, q. I. — Durandus, on this and the following questions, here, q. 2. — Dionysius the Carthusian, here, q. 4. — Biel, here, the single question at the end.
---
- Vers. 22.[Ephesians 1,] v. 22.
- Pro ergo edd. cum cod. cc inepte et.For ergo (therefore) the editions, with codex cc, ineptly read et (and).
- Ioan. 1, 16: Et de plenitudine eius nos omnes accepimus, et gratiam pro gratia. — Post accepimus cod. K supplet gratiam.John 1,16: And of His fullness we have all received, and grace for grace. — After accepimus (we have received) codex K supplies gratiam (grace).
- Cfr. verba August., quae habentur hic lit. Magistri, in principio.Cf. the words of Augustine, which are found here in the Master's text, at the beginning.
- Codd. M O subnectunt Christi.Codices M and O append Christi (of Christ).
- Nonnulli codd. uno numero; edd. Item, nihil unum creatum uno numero. Nostra lectio est codd. A H K M N O Z bb.Several codices read uno numero (one in number); the editions, Likewise, nothing created and one in number. Our reading is that of codices A H K M N O Z bb.
- Cod. G K antecedit.Codices G and K read antecedit (precedes).
- Aristot., VI. Topic. c. 2. Cfr. tom. I. pag. 4, nota 8. — Pro omnes autem codd. A L aa omnes enim.Aristotle, Topics VI, c. 2. Cf. vol. I, p. 4, note 8. — For omnes autem (now all) codices A L aa read omnes enim (for all).
- Cfr. Aristot., I. de Histor. animal. c. 7, II. de Partib. animal. c. 10. et IV. c. 10. Cfr. etiam August., Enarrat. in Ps. 29. enarrat. 2. n. 2, et de Agon. christian. c. 20. n. 22.Cf. Aristotle, History of Animals I, c. 7, Parts of Animals II, c. 10, and IV, c. 10. Cf. also Augustine, Enarration on Psalm 29, enarration 2, n. 2, and On the Christian Struggle c. 20, n. 22.
- Eph. 1, 22; 5, 23; Coloss. 1, 18. — Mox pro conformitas codd. A N U V conformitatis.Ephesians 1,22; 5,23; Colossians 1,18. — Presently, for conformitas (conformity) codices A N U V read conformitatis (of conformity).
- Tract. 80. n. 1. In Vat. nec non in textu origin. hoc testimonium terminatur sic: cuius et nos homines palmites esse possemus. In principio testimon. pro vitis et palmites edd. 1, 2 cum multis codd. vitis et palmes.Tractate 80, n. 1. In the Vatican edition, as also in the original text, this citation ends thus: of which we men too could be the branches. At the beginning of the citation, for vitis et palmites (vine and branches) editions 1 and 2, with many codices, read vitis et palmes (vine and branch).
- Vers. 18. — Glossa, quae est ordinaria, habetur apud Strabum et Lyranum, ubi tamen pro omnes iusti legitur omnes iustos et post virtute divinitatis sic pergitur: et misericordiae suae dono illuminavit (cfr. August., Serm. 341. [alias 40. de Temp.] c. 9. n. 11.). — Paulo superius post competit cod. U supplet ei.[Colossians 1,] v. 18. — The Gloss, which is the ordinary one, is found in Strabo and Lyra, where, however, for omnes iusti (all the just, nom.) is read omnes iustos (all the just, acc.), and after virtute divinitatis (by the power of the divinity) it continues thus: and by the gift of His mercy He illumined (cf. Augustine, Sermon 341 [otherwise 40, On the Seasons], c. 9, n. 11). — Slightly above, after competit (belongs) codex U supplies ei (to Him).
- Cfr. infra d. 19. a. 1. q. 1. seqq.Cf. below, d. 19, a. 1, q. 1, and following.
- Cfr. tom. II. pag. 265, nota 4. et 5. Verba baptizat interius idem dicunt quod illa verba Ioan. 1, 33: Hic est, qui baptizat in Spiritu sancto. — Verbis ab ipsa Veritate codd. K M O adiiciunt prima. Paulo inferius tum post merentis tum post efficientis cod. F supplet est.Cf. vol. II, p. 265, notes 4 and 5. The words baptizes interiorly say the same as those words of John 1,33: This is He who baptizes in the Holy Spirit. — To the words ab ipsa Veritate (by Truth itself) codices K M O add prima (first). Slightly below, both after merentis (meriting) and after efficientis (efficiency) codex F supplies est (is).
- Edd. secundum humanam naturam creatam... secundum naturam divinam increatam.The editions read according to created human nature... according to uncreated divine nature.
- Edd. posset.The editions read posset (could).
- Vers. 17. — Vat. Habitat Christus per etc. Cfr. I. Sent. d. 31. p. II. a. 2. q. I.[Ephesians 3,] v. 17. — The Vatican edition reads Christ dwells through etc. Cf. I Sentences, d. 31, p. II, a. 2, q. I.
- In corp. quaest. — Paulo superius pro quod ut caput sit edd. quod caput esse, multi codd. quod caput sit. Subinde pro de veritate codd. B C D G I K L N O T U V aa diversitate, perperam. Paulo inferius pro aliquo modo Christus principium [cod. Y Christum esse principium] edd. alio modo Christus [Vat. est] caput.In the body of the question. — Slightly above, for quod ut caput sit (that, for the head to be) the editions read quod caput esse, many codices quod caput sit. Then for de veritate (of the truth) codices B C D G I K L N O T U V aa read diversitate (of the diversity), wrongly. Slightly below, for aliquo modo Christus principium (in some way Christ the principle) [codex Y Christum esse principium] the editions read alio modo Christus [Vat. est] caput (in another way Christ is the Head).
- Epist. I. Cor. 3, 11. Cfr. supra pag. 236, nota 10. — Mox pro potuit edd. cum paucis codd. potest.Epistle I Corinthians 3,11. Cf. above, p. 236, note 10. — Presently, for potuit (could) the editions, with a few codices, read potest (can).
- Vers. 18. — Glossam ut ordinariam exhibent Strabus et Lyranus.[Colossians 1,] v. 18. — Strabo and Lyra present the Gloss as the ordinary one.
- Hic in solut. ad 2. — Paulo inferius pro comitaretur codd. K W X concomitaretur. In fine solut. pro utrumque edd. utramque.Here, in the solution to [objection] 2. — Slightly below, for comitaretur (accompany) codices K W X read concomitaretur. At the end of the solution, for utrumque (both) the editions read utramque.