← Back to Distinction 13

Dist. 13, Art. 2, Q. 3

Book III: On the Incarnation of the Word · Distinction 13

Textus Latinus
p. 288

Quaestio III. Utrum Deus mediante gratia capitis influat sensum in omnem creaturam habentem gratiam, sive angelicam, sive humanam.

Tertio quaeritur de gratia capitis quantum ad influentiam, et est quaestio, utrum mediante illa gratia Deus influat sensum in omnem aliam creaturam habentem gratiam, sive angelicam, sive humanam. Et quod sic, videtur.

1. Ad Ephesios primop288-3: Proposuit omnia instaurare in Christo, quae in caelis, et quae in terris sunt; Glossa: « Quae in caelis sunt, id est numerum Angelorum diminutum implere; et quae in terris, id est homines, qui per peccatum depravati erant, renovare »; sed illi mediante Christo sensum et motum suscipiunt, qui per ipsum instaurantur in esse perfecto: ergo si haec sunt caelestia et terrestria, homines et Angeli mediante ipso suscipiunt gratiam, et gratia capitis in hos et illos redundat.

2. Item, paulo post ibidemp288-4: Ipsum dedit caput super omnem Ecclesiam; sed caput influit in omnia membra: ergo Christus homo per suam gratiam in totam Ecclesiam habet influentiam. Sed Ecclesia communicat suas illuminationes Angelis, sicut dicitur ad Ephesios tertio: Ut innotescat Principatibus et Potestatibus per Ecclesiam multiformis sapientia Dei: ergo videtur, quod influentia gratiae Christi ad omnes electos habeat extendi.

3. Item, malitia principis tenebrarum non tantum se extendit ad daemones, immo magnam efficaciam habet in homines — unde illorum per superbiam efficitur princepsp288-5 — si ergo bonitas gratiae Christi est multo excellentior et efficacior et communior, videtur, quod ad omnes electos se extendit per efficaciam, sive sint homines, sive Angeli, sive viatores, sive beati.

4. Item, « iste est ordo divinae sapientiae et legis, ut dictat ratio, et vult Dionysiusp288-6, scilicet infima reduci per media, et media per suprema » — unde et Angeli ordinum inferiorum suscipiunt purgationes et perfectiones ab Angelis superiorum ordinum — sed Christus est super omnes tam Angelos quam Archangelos, sedet enim a dextris Dei, tanto melior Angelis effectus, quanto prae illis differentius nomen hereditavit: si ergo omnibus electis praeeminet excellentia perfecta, videtur, quod in omnes gratia eius habeat efficaciam et influentiam.

p. 289

Sed contra: 1. Caput non influit in cor, sed magis e conversop289-1: si ergo secundum rectam transsumtionem gratia illa, quae in alios redundat, dicitur gratia capitis; non videtur, quod influat in totum corpus Ecclesiae; aut si in totum influit, potius deberet gratia cordis quam capitis appellari.

2. Item, gratia capitis non influit nisi in eos qui iam sunt membra; et nulli sunt membrap289-2, nisi coniungantur ei per fidem et caritatem: ergo in nullos influit nisi in habentes fidem et caritatem. Sed habentes fidem et caritatem habent motum et sensum: ergo videtur, quod gratia capitis in nullos influat nec motum nec sensum; nec est aliud dare, quod influat: ergo etc.

3. Item, gratia capitis in eos solos influit, respectu quorum habens gratiam est caput; sed Christus secundum humanam naturam non est caput Angelorum, quia unius naturae sunt caput et membrap289-3: ergo nullam habet in Angelos influentiam.

4. Item, esto quod Filius Dei non esset incarnatus, Angeli essent beati; nec propter Christi incarnationem sunt aliqui ex eis redempti et liberati: ergo videtur, quod nihil eis conferat gratia Christi.

5. Item, nihil agit, nisi dum est; sed Christi gratia non fuit ante adventum Christi: ergo videtur, quod in illos qui Christi adventum praecesserunt, gratia illa nullum habuit effectum.

6. Item, si ita influebat ante adventum Christi in Sanctos, qui praecesserunt, sicut nunc in nobis habet effectump289-4: ergo sicut illud dicitur tempus gratiae propter redundantiam a plenitudine Christi, ita videtur, quod tempus illud deberet tempus gratiae dici; quod si non dicitur, videtur, quod influentia gratiae Christi non se extendat ad illos qui praecesserunt.

Conclusio. Gratia Christi influit in omnes, tam in Angelos, quam in homines, tam in eos qui praecesserunt ipsum, quam in eos qui secuti sunt, tamen non eodem modo, sed secundum magis et minus.

Respondeo: Ad praedictorum intelligentiam est notandum, quod sensus in spiritualibus attenditur quantum ad cognitionem, motus vero quantum ad affectionem et dilectionem, quae est pondus inclinansp289-5 unumquemque spiritum et trahens ad locum sibi debitum. Influere ergo motum et sensum est causare in nobis fidem et dilectionem, sive fidem operantem per dilectionem, sive cognitionem et amorem. Attendendum autem, quod cognitio et dilectio est in triplici differentia: quaedamp289-6, quae respicit statum meriti, et haec dicitur gratuita; quaedam vero, in qua consistit substantia praemii, et haec dicitur gloriosa; quaedam, quae est utrique annexa, quae nec est de essentia meriti nec praemii, sed de bene esse.

Secundum hanc triplicem differentiam cognitionis et dilectionis est dicere, quod gratia capitis influat in membra gratia increata effective, sed gratia creata meritorie et dispositive. Nam propter meritum passionis Christi promissum Patribus praecedentibus dedit Deus gratiam reconciliationis; et propter exhibitum dat nobis gratiam reconciliationis abundantius, in qua quidem gratia est sensus cognitionis et motus affectionisp289-7; et rursus, propter illam passionem aperta est ianua, ut omnibus membris Christi detur dilectio et cognitio gloriosa, in quibus consistit perfectio motus et sensus. — Ex hoc eodem Angelis mysteria multa revelantur, et gaudia multa conferuntur de restauratione sua, quae invenitur facta per Christump289-8. Et ideo etiam ipsi accipiunt motum et sensum; non, inquam, illum qui est de essentia gratiae et gloriae, sed qui est de bene esse ac perfectione.

Concedendum est igitur, quod gratia capitis redundat in omnes cives supernae Ierusalem, licet secundum plus et minus: nam magis in homines, qui redimuntur, quam in Angelos, qui reintegrantur; magisque in eos qui sequuntur eius adventum, quam in eos qui praecesserunt, quia clarius vident et credunt et charismatum donis amplius perfunduntur, propter hoc quod, si passio promissa tantum illis valuit, ut illos per viam salutis perduceret, amplius passio exhibita et soluta hoc debuit facere. — Propter hoc concedendae sunt rationes ad primam partem inductae.

1. Ad illud vero quod obiicitur, quod generalior est influentia cordis quam capitis; dicendum, quod generalior est secundum veritatem, sed tamen influentia capitis generalior est secundum manifestationem, pro eo quod in capite omnes sensus apparent et eminentiorem situm habent, et in eo sunt cellulae

p. 290

aptae ad cognoscendum et nervi apti ad sentiendum et movendum; ita quod nervi apti ad sentiendum a parte anteriori videntur egredi, et nervi apti ad motum a parte posteriori. Et quoniam transsumtio ad manifestandas proprietates spirituales latentes sumi debet a re manifesta; hinc est, quod propter generalem influentiam magis dicitur Christus caput, quam dicatur cor; propter quam etiam evidentiam medici discordant a naturalibus. Dicunt enim physici, quod principium motus et sensus est in capitep290-1, licet naturales, qui considerant principia rerum intimius, dicant, quod horum principium est corp290-2. Et sic patet illud.

2. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod caput non influit nisi in unita membra; dicendum, quod hocp290-3 habet veritatem in eo capite, quod habet determinatam potentiam et non potest sibi membra unire et de non-membro membrum facere. Et ideo hoc non habet locum in capite Christo, qui potest secundum divinam naturam de non-membro membrum facere, et secundum humanam naturam potest hoc mereri et impetrare, et ita primo sensum et motum influere et continuare.

3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod Angeli non sunt membra, quia non sunt conformes in natura; dicendum, quod etsi Angeli non debeant dici membra, tamen nihilominus influentia potest esse a Christo in Angelos non solum secundum divinam naturam, secundum quam est caput omnium, sed etiam secundum naturam humanam, per accidens tamen; quia influendo et redimendo membra sua reparat Christus ruinam angelicam. Quando ergo dicitur, quod gratia capitis non influit nisi in membra; si intelligantur membra proprie, sic non habet veritatem, nisi arctetur influentia ad influentiam proprie dictam, cuiusmodi est influentia gratiae et gloriae.

4. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod Angeli essent beati, etiam si Christus non esset incarnatus; dicendum, quod hoc non cogit, quod Christus nullo modo influat, sed quod non influit primum motum et sensum, qui sunt essentiales gratiae et gloriae. Aliquo tamen modo potest influere quod facit ad bene esse, sicut prius ostensum est.

5. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod illud non potest influere, quod non habet esse; dicendum, quod verum est de influentia per modum principii effectivi, de influentia autem per modum meriti non habet veritatem. Sufficit enim, quod sit in fide et dilectione credentis; ac per hoc, dum creditur et amatur, ab ipso credens et amans vivificetur, et dum etiam promittitur, ex ipsa promissione divina severitatis rigor aliquatenus placetur, ut benevolentiam suam reddat.

6. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod tempus praecedens deberet dici tempus gratiae; dicendum, quod in tempore praecedenti gratia Christi non defuit; attamen non debet illud tempus gratiae, sed umbrae dici, quia non erat tanta redundantia gratiae, quae velamen figurarum effugaret et onus Legis alleviaret. Nunc autem, cum manifesta est veritas, et per amorem alleviata sunt mandata, vere dicendum est tempus gratiae advenisse. Unde Christus efficaciam habuit in his qui praeibant et sequebanturp290-4, ut botrus in palo portabatur ab antecedentibus et sequentibus, sed praeeuntes ferebant et non videbant, sequentes vero et ferebant et aperte videbant: sic similitudinarie in proposito intelligendum est.

p. 291
Scholion

I. Cum Christus constitutus sit caput super omnem Ecclesiam (Eph. I, 22.), quaeritur, ad quos se extendat ista relatio, quae est inter caput et membra, tum quoad homines, tum quoad Angelos. Manifestum est, quod Christus nullatenus sit caput damnatorum hominum et daemonum; item, quod actu sit caput beatorum hominum animarumque in purgatorio existentium. Quoad viatores, cum Ecclesia sit corpus Christi mysticum, iidem, qui membra sunt Ecclesiae, etiam membra sunt Christi, divini Ecclesiae capitis. Constat autem, quod Ecclesiae membra sunt non soli praedestinati, ut praeter Calvinum docuit Huss (cfr. art. I. 20. 21, a Concil. Constant. condemnati, et propositio 73. Quesnelli, damnata a Clemente XI. an. 1713), neque soli iusti, ut cum Donatistis multi alii haeretici docuerunt, quod pluries reprobavit Ecclesia, praesertim in Conc. Trident. (Sess. VI. can. 28.) et an. 1794 Pius VI. contra Synodum Pistoriensem (Bulla Auctorem Fidei, prop. 15.). — Sed notandum est, secundum varios modos et gradus posse aliquem esse membrum Ecclesiae, et per consequens etiam Christum esse eius caput. Quinque gradus recenset S. Thom. (S. III. q. 8. a. 3.) dicens: « Primo et principaliter est caput eorum qui actu uniuntur sibi per gloriam; secundo eorum qui actu sibi uniuntur per caritatem; tertio eorum qui actu uniuntur sibi per fidem; quarto vero, qui sibi uniuntur solum in potentia nondum reducta ad actum, quae tamen est ad actum reducenda secundum divinam praedestinationem; quinto vero eorum qui in potentia sunt sibi unita, quae nunquam reducetur ad actum ». — Nonnulli autem propter convenientiam in natura et propter gratias actuales, quas Salvator omnium solet etiam infidelibus largiri, adhuc amplius extendunt rationem capitis; sed tunc sumitur haec ratio in sensu non proprio. Generali enim quadam ratione dici potest, Christum esse caput omnium hominum viatorum in omni tempore.

II. Quoad Angelos Guliel. Antissiodorensis (Summa aurea p. III. tr. I. c. 4. q. 2.) aliique pauci negaverunt, Christum esse caput bonorum Angelorum. In explicatione autem contrariae et communissimae sententiae non conveniunt theologi. Nam cum Scoto non pauci, etiam ex ipsa schola S. Thomae, tenent, Christum influere in Angelos gratiam et gloriam non tantum accidentalem (ut docet S. Bonav. nec non, ut videtur probabilius, ipse S. Thom.), sed etiam essentialem. Hoc profitentur praecipue qui rationem incarnationis a lapsu protoparentum non dependere dicunt (cfr. supra d. I. a. 2. q. 2.). — Quod Christus sit caput Angelorum, docet S. Bonav. etiam supra d. I. a. 2. q. 2. ad 7, infra d. 14. dub. 4; Breviloq. p. IV. c. 3.

III. Alex. Hal., S. p. III. q. 12. m. 2. a. 2. § 1-4. et a. 3. § I. — Scot., III. Sent. d. 19. q. unica n. 8. seqq., d. 7. q. 3. — S. Thom., hic q. 2. a. 2; S. III. q. 8. a. 3. 4. — B. Albert., hic a. 2. 9. — Petr. a Tar., hic q. 2. a. 2. — Richard. a Med., hic a. 2. q. 2.

---

English Translation

Question III. Whether God, by means of the grace of the Head, infuses sense into every creature having grace, whether angelic or human.

Thirdly, inquiry is made concerning the grace of the Head as regards influence, and the question is whether, by means of that grace, God infuses sense into every other creature having grace, whether angelic or human. And that he does so seems to be the case.

1. To the Ephesians, chapter onep288-3: He purposed to restore all things in Christ, which are in heaven and which are on earth; the Gloss: « Which are in heaven, that is, to fill up the diminished number of the Angels; and which are on earth, that is, to renew men, who had been depraved through sin »; but those receive sense and motion by means of Christ, who are restored through him into perfect being: therefore, if these are the heavenly and earthly things, men and Angels receive grace by means of him, and the grace of the Head redounds into these and into those.

2. Likewise, a little after, in the same placep288-4: Him he gave as head over the whole Church; but the head infuses into all the members: therefore Christ as man, through his grace, has influence into the whole Church. But the Church communicates her illuminations to the Angels, as is said to the Ephesians, chapter three: That there may be made known to the Principalities and Powers through the Church the manifold wisdom of God: therefore it seems that the influence of Christ's grace must be extended to all the elect.

3. Likewise, the malice of the prince of darkness does not extend itself only to the demons; rather, it has great efficacy upon men — whence through pride he is made their princep288-5 — if therefore the goodness of Christ's grace is much more excellent and more efficacious and more common, it seems that it extends itself by efficacy to all the elect, whether they be men, or Angels, or wayfarers, or the blessed.

4. Likewise, « this is the order of the divine wisdom and law, as reason dictates and as Dionysius willsp288-6, namely that the lowest be led back through the middle, and the middle through the highest » — whence also the Angels of the lower orders receive purgations and perfections from the Angels of the higher orders — but Christ is above all, both Angels and Archangels, for he sits at the right hand of God, made so much better than the Angels as he has inherited a more excellent name beyond them: if therefore he is preeminent over all the elect by a perfect excellence, it seems that his grace has efficacy and influence into all.

On the contrary: 1. The head does not infuse into the heart, but rather the conversep289-1: if therefore, according to a correct transumption, that grace which redounds into others is called the grace of the Head; it does not seem that it infuses into the whole body of the Church; or if it infuses into the whole, it ought rather to be called the grace of the heart than of the head.

2. Likewise, the grace of the Head infuses only into those who are already members; and none are membersp289-2 unless they be joined to him through faith and charity: therefore it infuses into none except those having faith and charity. But those having faith and charity have motion and sense: therefore it seems that the grace of the Head infuses neither motion nor sense into any; nor is there anything else to assign that it might infuse: therefore, etc.

3. Likewise, the grace of the Head infuses only into those with respect to whom the one having grace is head; but Christ, according to his human nature, is not the head of the Angels, since head and members are of one naturep289-3: therefore he has no influence into the Angels.

4. Likewise, supposing that the Son of God had not become incarnate, the Angels would be blessed; nor are any of them redeemed and liberated on account of Christ's incarnation: therefore it seems that the grace of Christ confers nothing on them.

5. Likewise, nothing acts except while it exists; but Christ's grace did not exist before the coming of Christ: therefore it seems that, upon those who preceded the coming of Christ, that grace had no effect.

6. Likewise, if it so flowed in before the coming of Christ into the Saints who preceded, just as now it has effectp289-4 in us: therefore, just as this is called the time of grace on account of the redundancy from the fullness of Christ, so it seems that that time too ought to be called the time of grace; and if it is not so called, it seems that the influence of Christ's grace does not extend itself to those who preceded.

Conclusion. The grace of Christ infuses into all, both into the Angels and into men, both into those who preceded him and into those who followed, yet not in the same way, but according to more and less.

I respond: For the understanding of the foregoing, it must be noted that sense, in spiritual things, is regarded as to cognition, but motion as to affection and love, which is the weight incliningp289-5 each spirit and drawing it to the place owed to it. To infuse motion and sense, therefore, is to cause in us faith and love, whether faith working through love, or cognition and love. But it must be noted that cognition and love are in a threefold difference: onep289-6 which regards the state of merit, and this is called gratuitous; another in which the substance of the reward consists, and this is called glorious; another which is annexed to both, which is neither of the essence of merit nor of reward, but of well-being.

According to this threefold difference of cognition and love, one must say that the grace of the Head infuses into the members by uncreated grace effectively, but by created grace meritoriously and dispositively. For on account of the merit of Christ's passion promised, God gave to the preceding Fathers the grace of reconciliation; and on account of the passion exhibited, he gives to us the grace of reconciliation more abundantly, in which grace indeed there is the sense of cognition and the motion of affectionp289-7; and again, on account of that passion the door was opened, so that to all the members of Christ there might be given glorious love and cognition, in which the perfection of motion and sense consists. — From this same thing many mysteries are revealed to the Angels, and many joys are conferred upon them concerning their restoration, which is found to have been accomplished through Christp289-8. And therefore they too receive motion and sense; not, I say, that which is of the essence of grace and glory, but that which is of well-being and perfection.

It must therefore be granted that the grace of the Head redounds into all the citizens of the heavenly Jerusalem, albeit according to more and less: for more into men, who are redeemed, than into the Angels, who are reintegrated; and more into those who follow his coming than into those who preceded, because they see and believe more clearly and are more abundantly suffused with the gifts of the charisms, on account of this, that if the promised passion availed only so far for them as to lead them through the way of salvation, the passion exhibited and accomplished ought to do more. — On account of this, the reasons adduced for the first part must be granted.

1. To that, however, which is objected, that the influence of the heart is more general than that of the head; it must be said that it is more general according to truth, but nevertheless the influence of the head is more general according to manifestation, for the reason that in the head all the senses appear and have a more eminent position, and in it are the cells

apt for cognizing and the nerves apt for sensing and moving; so that the nerves apt for sensing seem to issue from the front part, and the nerves apt for motion from the rear part. And since a transumption for manifesting latent spiritual properties ought to be taken from a manifest thing; hence it is that, on account of the general influence, Christ is rather called head than called heart; on account of which evidence, too, the physicians disagree with the natural philosophers. For the physicians say that the principle of motion and sense is in the headp290-1, although the natural philosophers, who consider the principles of things more intimately, say that the principle of these is the heartp290-2. And thus that is clear.

2. To that which is objected, that the head does not infuse except into united members; it must be said that thisp290-3 holds true in that head which has a determinate power and cannot unite members to itself and make a member out of a non-member. And therefore this does not hold in the case of Christ the Head, who can, according to his divine nature, make a member out of a non-member, and according to his human nature can merit and obtain this, and so first infuse and continue sense and motion.

3. To that which is objected, that the Angels are not members, because they are not conformed in nature; it must be said that, even though the Angels ought not be called members, nevertheless there can still be an influence from Christ into the Angels, not only according to his divine nature, according to which he is head of all, but also according to his human nature, by accident however; because by infusing and redeeming his members Christ repairs the angelic ruin. When therefore it is said that the grace of the Head does not infuse except into members; if members be understood properly, then it does not hold true, unless the influence be restricted to influence properly so called, of which kind is the influence of grace and glory.

4. To that which is objected, that the Angels would be blessed even if Christ had not become incarnate; it must be said that this does not compel the conclusion that Christ in no way infuses, but that he does not infuse the first motion and sense, which are essential to grace and glory. In some way, however, he can infuse that which makes for well-being, as was shown before.

5. To that which is objected, that that which does not have being cannot infuse; it must be said that this is true of influence by way of an effective principle, but of influence by way of merit it does not hold true. For it suffices that it be in the faith and love of the believer; and through this, while it is believed and loved, the believer and lover is vivified by it, and while too it is promised, by that very promise the rigor of divine severity is somewhat appeased, so that he may render his benevolence.

6. To that which is objected, that the preceding time ought to be called the time of grace; it must be said that in the preceding time the grace of Christ was not lacking; yet that time ought not be called of grace, but of shadow, because there was not so great a redundancy of grace as might drive off the veil of the figures and lighten the burden of the Law. But now, when the truth is manifest, and the commandments have been lightened through love, it must truly be said that the time of grace has come. Whence Christ had efficacy in those who went before and who followedp290-4, as a cluster of grapes was carried on a pole by those going before and those following, but those going before bore it and did not see it, while those following both bore it and openly saw it: so by way of likeness it must be understood in the matter at hand.

Scholion

I. Since Christ is constituted head over the whole Church (Eph. I, 22.), it is asked to whom this relation, which is between head and members, extends, both as to men and as to the Angels. It is manifest that Christ is in no way the head of damned men and of demons; likewise, that he is actually the head of blessed men and of the souls existing in purgatory. As to wayfarers, since the Church is the mystical body of Christ, the same who are members of the Church are also members of Christ, the divine head of the Church. But it is established that the members of the Church are not the predestinate alone, as Huss taught besides Calvin (cf. art. I. 20. 21, condemned by the Council of Constance, and proposition 73 of Quesnel, condemned by Clement XI in the year 1713), nor the just alone, as with the Donatists many other heretics taught, which the Church has reproved many times, especially in the Council of Trent (Sess. VI. can. 28.) and in the year 1794 Pius VI against the Synod of Pistoia (Bull Auctorem Fidei, prop. 15.). — But it must be noted that, according to various modes and degrees, someone can be a member of the Church, and consequently Christ can be his head. S. Thomas (S. III. q. 8. a. 3.) enumerates five degrees, saying: « First and principally he is the head of those who are actually united to him through glory; secondly of those who are actually united to him through charity; thirdly of those who are actually united to him through faith; fourthly indeed of those who are united to him only in potency not yet reduced to act, which is nevertheless to be reduced to act according to divine predestination; fifthly of those who are in potency united to him, which will never be reduced to act ». — Some, however, on account of conformity in nature and on account of the actual graces which the Savior of all is wont to bestow even on the unbelieving, extend the notion of head still further; but then this notion is taken in a non-proper sense. For by a certain general reckoning it can be said that Christ is the head of all wayfaring men in every time.

II. As to the Angels, William of Auxerre (Summa aurea p. III. tr. I. c. 4. q. 2.) and a few others denied that Christ is the head of the good Angels. But in the explanation of the contrary and most common opinion the theologians do not agree. For with Scotus not a few, even from the very school of S. Thomas, hold that Christ infuses into the Angels grace and glory not only accidental (as S. Bonaventure teaches, and, as seems more probable, S. Thomas himself), but also essential. This is professed especially by those who say that the reason for the incarnation does not depend upon the fall of the first parents (cf. above d. I. a. 2. q. 2.). — That Christ is the head of the Angels, S. Bonaventure teaches also above d. I. a. 2. q. 2. ad 7, below d. 14. dub. 4; Breviloquium p. IV. c. 3.

III. Alex. of Hales, S. p. III. q. 12. m. 2. a. 2. § 1-4. and a. 3. § I. — Scotus, III. Sent. d. 19. q. unica n. 8. seqq., d. 7. q. 3. — S. Thomas, here q. 2. a. 2; S. III. q. 8. a. 3. 4. — B. Albert, here a. 2. 9. — Petr. a Tar., here q. 2. a. 2. — Richard of Mediavilla, here a. 2. q. 2.

---

Apparatus Criticus
  1. Vers. 9. seq. — Verba Glossae, quae ordinaria est et habetur apud Petr. Lombardum et Lyranum in hunc loc., delibata sunt ex August., Enchirid. c. 62. n. 16. — Circa finem arg. post suscipiunt gratiam cod. F addit unionis.
    Verse 9 ff. — The words of the Gloss, which is the ordinary one and is found in Peter Lombard and Lyra on this passage, are drawn from Augustine, Enchiridion c. 62. n. 16. — Near the end of the argument, after suscipiunt gratiam (they receive grace) codex F adds unionis (of union).
  2. Cap. 1, 22. — Locus seq. Scripturae est Eph. 3, 10. — De minori cfr. supra q. I. — Pro suas illuminationes edd. suas influentias. In fine arg. pro ad omnes Vat. perperam ad homines.
    Chapter 1, 22. — The following passage of Scripture is Eph. 3, 10. — On the minor [premise] cf. above q. I. — For suas illuminationes (her illuminations) the editions read suas influentias (her inflowings). At the end of the argument, for ad omnes (to all) the Vatican edition wrongly [reads] ad homines (to men).
  3. Iob 41, 25: Ipse est rex super universos filios superbiae.
    Job 41, 25: He is king over all the sons of pride.
  4. De Caelest. Hierarch. c. 4. § 3. et c. 8. § 2. Cfr. tom. II. pag. 277, nota 7. — Seq. Script. locus est Hebr. 1, 3. — Pro per media, et media per suprema codd. M O per media ad suprema. In ultima propos. arg. edd. post si ergo supplent Christus.
    On the Celestial Hierarchy c. 4. § 3. and c. 8. § 2. Cf. tom. II. p. 277, note 7. — The following passage of Scripture is Heb. 1, 3. — For per media, et media per suprema (through the middle, and the middle through the highest) codices M O [read] per media ad suprema (through the middle to the highest). In the last proposition of the argument, after si ergo (if therefore) the editions supply Christus (Christ).
  5. Aristot., II. de Generat. animal. c. 4. docet, in generatione cor secerni primum, ex eoque incrementum et motum ceteris partibus contingere. Cfr. III. de Partib. animal. c. 4.
    Aristotle, II. On the Generation of Animals c. 4. teaches that in generation the heart is set apart first, and from it increase and motion come to the other parts. Cf. III. On the Parts of Animals c. 4.
  6. Cod. K addit Christi. Circa finem arg. pro in nullos cod. D exhibet in mutos; in cod. V manus posterior vocabulo nullos ascripsit mutos. Deinde post nec sensum non pauci codd. interserunt ergo.
    Codex K adds Christi (of Christ). Near the end of the argument, for in nullos (into none) codex D shows in mutos (into the mute); in codex V a later hand wrote mutos (mute) beside the word nullos (none). Then after nec sensum (nor sense) not a few codices insert ergo (therefore).
  7. Vide supra q. I.
    See above q. I.
  8. Cod. W haberet effectum. In edd. legitur sic: sicut nunc in nos, si [edd. 1, 2 sic] habuit effectum in illis, sicut nunc in nobis habet effectum etc.
    Codex W [reads] haberet effectum (it would have effect). In the editions it is read thus: sicut nunc in nos, si [edd. 1, 2 sic] habuit effectum in illis, sicut nunc in nobis habet effectum (just as now into us, if [edd. 1, 2: thus] it had effect in them, just as now it has effect in us) etc.
  9. August., XIII. Confess. c. 9. n. 10: Pondus meum amor meus, eo feror quocumque feror. Et XI. de Civ. Dei, c. 28: Nam velut amores corporum momenta sunt ponderum sive deorsum gravitate, sive sursum levitate nitantur. Ita enim corpus pondere, sicut animus amore fertur, quocumque fertur. — Mox pro causare etiam plures codd. creare, cod. G dare.
    Augustine, XIII. Confessions c. 9. n. 10: My weight is my love; by it I am borne wherever I am borne. And XI. On the City of God, c. 28: For just as the loves of bodies are the momenta of weights, whether they strive downward by gravity or upward by levity. For thus a body is borne by weight, as the soul by love, wherever it is borne. — Presently for causare (to cause) several codices also [read] creare (to create), codex G dare (to give).
  10. Cod. K hic et inferius post quaedam vero supplet est.
    Codex K, here and below, after quaedam vero (another however) supplies est (is).
  11. Cfr. infra d. 19. a. 1. q. 1. seqq. De seq. propos. vide infra d. 18. a. 2. q. 3.
    Cf. below d. 19. a. 1. q. 1. ff. On the following proposition see below d. 18. a. 2. q. 3.
  12. Cfr. supra pag. 67, nota 7, et II. Sent. d. 9. q. 5. nec non d. 11. a. 2. q. 2.
    Cf. above p. 67, note 7, and II. Sent. d. 9. q. 5., as also d. 11. a. 2. q. 2.
  13. S. Thom., hic q. 2. a. 1. ad 8. ait: Dicendum, quod cor est principium virium vitalium in toto corpore et est primum principium omnium membrorum quantum ad esse, ut dicit Philosophus; sed caput est principium virium animalium, quae pertinent ad sensum et ad motum.
    S. Thomas, here q. 2. a. 1. ad 8, says: It must be said that the heart is the principle of the vital powers in the whole body and is the first principle of all the members as to being, as the Philosopher says; but the head is the principle of the animal powers, which pertain to sense and to motion.
  14. Haec illius aetatis doctrina sumta esse videtur ex Avicenna, I. Canon. Fen 1. Doctrin. 5. c. 1, qui, postquam prius statuit, « quod est membrum suscipiens et tribuens, et membrum tribuens et non suscipiens, et membrum suscipiens et non tribuens, et membrum neque tribuens neque suscipiens », disserit sic: De membri autem tribuentis et suscipientis inventione non dubitamus. In cerebro namque et hepate omnes convenerunt medici, quod unumquodque eorum virtutem vitae suscipit et calorem naturalem et spiritum a corde; et unumquodque eorum principium habet virtutis, quam aliis tribuit. Sed cerebrum quidem praebet sensum secundum quosdam absolute, et secundum quosdam non absolute; et hepar est principium nutrimenti secundum quosdam absolute, et secundum quosdam non absolute. De membri autem suscipientis et non tribuentis inventione non dubitamus, sicut caro est, quae sentiendi virtutem et vitae suscipit, et non est alicuius virtutis principium, quam alii ullo modo tribuat. De aliis vero duabus divisionis partibus, in una earum medici a magno philosophorum [i. e. Aristot.] diversificati sunt. Philosophorum namque magnus dixit, quod membrum tribuens et non recipiens est cor; ipsum enim est omnium virtutum prima radix et omnibus aliis membris suas tribuit virtutes, quibus nutriuntur et vivunt et quibus comprehendunt et quibus movent. Medici autem et quidam primorum philosophorum [ut Plato, qui, cum tres animas esse vellet, unicuique earum etiam membrum quoddam speciale ut sedem addixit: cerebrum, cor et iecur] has virtutes in membris partiti sunt, et non dixerunt, quod sit membrum tribuens et non suscipiens. Et Philosophi quidem sermo, cum subtiliter certificatur, est veracior, sed medicorum sermo, in primis cum attenditur, est magis manifestus etc. Cfr. ibid. Doctrin. 6. c. 1, et Averroes, in II. de Partib. animal. c. 7. et II. Colliget, c. 9, ubi sententiam Aristot. defendit contra Galenum.
    This doctrine of that age seems to have been taken from Avicenna, I. Canon, Fen 1. Doctrine 5. c. 1, who, after first establishing that « there is a member receiving and bestowing, and a member bestowing and not receiving, and a member receiving and not bestowing, and a member neither bestowing nor receiving », discusses thus: But concerning the finding of a member bestowing and receiving we do not doubt. For in the brain and the liver all the physicians have agreed that each of them receives the power of life and natural heat and spirit from the heart; and each of them has the principle of the power which it bestows on the others. But the brain indeed provides sense, according to some absolutely, and according to some not absolutely; and the liver is the principle of nutriment, according to some absolutely, and according to some not absolutely. But concerning the finding of a member receiving and not bestowing we do not doubt, as is the flesh, which receives the power of sensing and of life, and is not the principle of any power which it bestows on another in any way. But concerning the other two parts of the division, in one of them the physicians have differed from the great one of the philosophers [i. e. Aristotle]. For the great one of the philosophers said that the member bestowing and not receiving is the heart; for it is the first root of all the powers and bestows on all the other members their powers, by which they are nourished and live and by which they comprehend and by which they move. But the physicians and certain of the first philosophers [as Plato, who, since he held there to be three souls, also assigned to each of them a certain special member as its seat: the brain, the heart, and the liver] distributed these powers among the members, and did not say that there is a member bestowing and not receiving. And the discourse of the Philosopher indeed, when it is subtly verified, is more truthful, but the discourse of the physicians, at first when it is attended to, is more manifest, etc. Cf. ibid. Doctrine 6. c. 1, and Averroes, in II. On the Parts of Animals c. 7. and II. Colliget, c. 9, where he defends the opinion of Aristotle against Galen.
  15. Pro hoc edd. cum nonnullis codd. solum, codd. F G I L T U V Z (K aa primitus) vitiose non. Circa finem arg. pro primo codd. H M O bb potest, et pro continuare edd. continere.
    For hoc (this) the editions, with some codices, [read] solum (only), codices F G I L T U V Z (K aa originally) faultily non (not). Near the end of the argument, for primo (first) codices H M O bb [read] potest (he can), and for continuare (to continue) the editions [read] continere (to contain).
  16. Marc. 11, 9. Exemplum allatum est ex Num. 13, 24. — Vat. ut botrus in palmite vel palo [i. e. paxillo, quo sustentatur vitis; cfr. Du Cange etc.].
    Mark 11, 9. The example adduced is from Num. 13, 24. — The Vatican edition [reads] ut botrus in palmite vel palo (like a cluster on a branch or pole) [i. e. on a stake by which the vine is supported; cf. Du Cange etc.]. ---
← Dist. 13, Art. 2, Q. 2Dist. 13, Dubia→