← Back to Distinction 20

Dist. 20, Art. 1, Q. 2

Book III: On the Incarnation of the Word · Distinction 20

Textus Latinus
p. 419

Quaestio II. Utrum magis congruerit, genus humanum reparari per satisfactionem quam per aliam viam.

Secundo quaeritur, utrum magis congruat, genus humanum reparari per satisfactionem quam per aliam viam. Et quod sic, ostenditur per quatuor suppositionesp419-1, quarum prima est haec: illa via magis conveniens fuit ad reparationem humani generis, in qua magis servatur ordo divinae iustitiae. — Secunda est haec: illa via magis congruit reparationi humani generis, in qua magis servatur ordo divinae sapientiae. — Tertia est haec: illa via magis convenit reparationi humani generis, in qua magis servatur praesidentia divinae potestatis. — Quarta est haec: illa via magis convenit reparationi humani generis, in qua magis servatur honorificentia divinae maiestatis.

1. His praesuppositis, arguitur sic: magis servatur ordo divinae iustitiae, cum malum punitur, quam cum relinquitur impunitum; sed cum peccator reparatur per satisfactionem, malum punitur; cum sine satisfactione, relinquitur impunitum: ergo magis servatur ordo divinae iustitiae in reparatione per satisfactionem quam sine satisfactione: ergo per primam suppositionem via ista magis convenit reparando generi humanop419-2.

2. Item, secundo arguitur sic: ordinatio peccantium in suppliciis, sive peccati in poena, manifestat decorem divinae sapientiae, quae non patitur, universum ex aliqua sui parte turpari; sed cum peccator relevatur per satisfactionem, ad culpam sequitur poena; cum vero sine satisfactione, culpa non ordinatur per poenam: ergo reparatio generis humani per satisfactionem plus convenit divinae sapientiae quam sine: ergo per secundam suppositionem via ista reparandi magis est congrua et idonea in sep419-3.

3. Item, tertio arguitur sic: si malum non puniretur et relinqueretur sine aliqua satisfactione, iniustitia nulli legi subiaceret; et si hoc, divina potestas non omnibus praesideret;

p. 420

sed cum pro peccato satisfactio exigitur, peccator subditur poenae auctoritate divinae iustitiae: ergo in modo reparandi genus humanum per satisfactionem magis praelucet praesidentia divinae potestatis quam per aliam viam: igitur per tertiam suppositionem via ista magis est congruap420-1.

4. Item, quarto arguitur sic: peccator, cum peccat, per praevaricationem Deum inhonoratp420-2: si ergo peccatum dimittitur sine satisfactione, peccatum relinquitur absque honoris ablati recompensatione; cum autem satisfactio redditur, honor recompensatur: ergo in modo reparandi hominem per satisfactionem magis servatur honorificentia divinae maiestatis quam per alium modum: igitur per quartam suppositionem hac via reparationis magis congruit genus humanum reparari.

Ex his eisdem rationibus non solum potest concludi, quod haec via sit magis congrua, sed etiam, quod alia non potest esse congrua; verumtamen non sunt ita efficaces ad probandum secundum, sicut ad probandum primum, quia praeter hasp420-3 congruentias possunt et aliae reperiri, licet istae sint magis excellentes.

Sed contra: 1. Magis decet Deum facere quod magis facit ad ostensionem suae benignitatis et misericordiae; sed dimittere peccata omnia absque aliqua satisfactione poenae, hoc est maioris misericordiae quam exigere ab illis poenam: si ergo Deus est misericordissimus et benignissimus, adeo ut benignior cogitari non possit; videtur ergo, quod modus ille reparandi, qui est praeter satisfactionem, magis conveniat divinae excellentiaep420-4.

2. Item, modus ille magis convenit reparationi humani generis, qui magis est ostensivus divinae sufficientiae; sed si sic Deus genus humanum repararet, quod nullam requireret satisfactionem, magis appareret divina sufficientia — ostenderetur enim tunc, quod emendarum nostrarum et bonorum nostrorum non indigetp420-5 — ergo modus reparandi absque omni satisfactione magis esset conveniens humano generi.

3. Item, ille modus magis convenit reparationi humanae, qui magis est ostensivus divinae potentiae, pro eo quod reparatio est quaedam recreatiop420-6; sed si Deus absque omni satisfactione solo verbo reparasset genus humanum, sicut fabricavit mundum, maior esset ibi divinae virtutis ostensio: ergo magis convenit iste modus humano generi reparando.

4. Item, modus ille magis convenit reparationi generis humani, in quo homo magis astringitur ad amandum et laudandum Deum; sed si Deus culpam homini reliquisset absque omni satisfactione et poena, esset magis amandus et laudandus ab homine, homo enim plura a Deo percepisset: ergo talis modus reparationi humanae magis congrueret.

5. Item, modus ille magis congruit reparationi generis humani, in quo magis eruditur homo ad exsecutionem divini mandati et imitationem Dei; sed homo debet remittere et condonare alii culpam et poenamp420-7: ergo si Deus homini debuit dare exemplum perfectionis, videtur, quod magis Deum decuerit reparare genus humanum totum relaxando quam satisfactionem aliquam exigendo.

6. Item, ille modus reparandi magis decet Deum, qui est a Deo immediate, quam qui est a Deo mediante adiutorio creaturae — quoniam sicut decuit Deum magis per se ipsum creare, sic magis videtur esse decens per se ipsum recrearep420-8 — sed reparatio per satisfactionem est mediante creatura satisfaciente: ergo videtur, quod magis decuerit Deum reparare genus humanum absque omni satisfactione per se ipsum, quam mediante satisfactione per creaturae adiutorium.

Conclusio.

Magis fuit congruum et ex parte Dei et ex parte nostra, genus humanum reparari per satisfactionem.

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod absque dubio magis congruum fuit, genus humanum reparari per satisfactionem quam per aliam viam, secundum quod dicit Anselmus, et Augustinusp420-9. Et ratio huius est ex parte Dei et ex parte nostra. Ex parte, inquam, Dei, quia universae viae Domini misericordia et veritasp420-10, cum ipse sit summe iustus et misericors.

p. 421

Et ideo in reparatione generis humani, quae est excellentissima viarum Dei, congruum est, ut simul currat misericordia cum iustitia. Et ideo decens fuit, ut Deus ab homine satisfactionem exigeret pro iniuria sibi facta, et si homo non posset, tunc misericordia divina subveniret dando sibi mediatorem, qui pro eo satisfaceret. Et iste modus magis fuit congruus quam alius. Nam si Deus culpam non dimisisset, sed vindictam exegisset; non manifestaretur eius misericordia; si vero omnino dimisisset nec satisfactionem exegisset, non manifestaretur iustitia. Si ergo istae duae conditiones sunt in Dei opere servandae praecipuep421-1, magis congruebat, humanam naturam reparari per satisfactionem quam per aliam viam, ex parte Dei reparantis.

Magis etiam congruebat ex parte nostri, pro eo quod reparatio nostra ad hoc erat, ut nos reduceret a culpa ad iustitiam, a miseria ad gloriam. Sicut ergo, cum genus humanum cecidit per culpam, Deum inhonoravit per praevaricationem et inordinatam delectationem; sic, cum redit a culpa ad iustitiam, decens est, ut Deum honoret sustinendo poenam, et in hoc magis reparatur ad normam iustitiae. Rursus, sicut gloriosius est acquirere vitam aeternam per merita quam sine meritisp421-2, sic gloriosius est reconciliari Deo per satisfactionem quam sine. — Modus igitur reparandi per satisfactionem plus convenit nostrae iustificationi et nostrae glorificationi. Si igitur haec duo principaliter considerantur in reparatione generis humani, planum est, quod hic modus reparandi magis conveniens est tam ex parte Dei reparantis, quam ex parte humani generis reparati. — Unde rationes, quae hoc ostendunt, concedendae sunt.

1. Ad illud vero quod obiicitur de manifestatione benignitatis et misericordiae, dicendum, quod summa benignitas et misericordia in Deo non excludunt iustitiam, et ideo non sic debuit manifestarip421-3 in opere reparationis, quod iustitia non haberet locum; sed ita debuit manifestari divina misericordia, quod simul cum hoc ostenderetur divina iustitia. Et hoc idem factum est, cum Deus reparavit genus humanum per mortem Filii sui, ubi fuit maxima aequitas in exigendo tantae satisfactionis pretium, et maxima benignitas in tradendo unigenitum Filium suum.

2. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod magis manifestareturp421-4 divina sufficientia, si non exigeret satisfactionem; dicendum, quod sicut Deus exigit a nobis mandatorum suorum observantiam non propter suam indigentiam, sed propter ordinationem nostram, qua debemus ei tanquam Domino obedire: sic et peccatorum exigit emendam, non propter hoc, quod indigeat, sed ut nos reducat ad ordinationem debitam. Et ideo obiectio illa procedebat ex suppositione falsi, cum dicebatur, magis sine satisfactione divinam sufficientiam manifestari.

3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod modus alius magis manifestaret divinam potentiam; dicendum, quod etsi in omni opere Dei ostendatur divina potentia, in opere tamen reparationis magis manifestatur benignitas et misericordia, et per consequens ipsa iustitia eis annexa. Et ideo, cum posset uno verbo genus humanum reparare, maluit tamen reparare cum difficultate et poenalitate, quia magis opportunum erat, ibi ostendi misericordiam quam potentiam. Potentia enim satis claruerat in rerum eductione; sed adhuc latebat misericordia, quam ostendebat Deus in hominis reparationep421-5.

4. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod reparatio, praetermissa satisfactione, magis astringeret nos ad laudandum et amandum Deum; dicendum, quod hoc falsum est; plus enim nos astringit ad amorem et laudem Dei hoc, quod dedit Unigenitum suum pro nobis, quam si absque hoc condonasset nobis et poenam et culpam. Multo enim maius fuit, quod Deus pro nobis mortem subiret, quam peccata nostra condonaret; multo etiam maius fuit dando nobis Filium peccata condonare, quam si simpliciter peccata condonasset. Qui enim proprio Filio non pepercit, sed pro nobis omnibus tradidit illum, quomodo non omnia nobis cum illo donavit? sicut dicitur ad Romanos octavop421-6. Et sic patet illud, quod procedebat ex suppositione falsi.

5. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod si satisfactionem non exegisset, magis praebuisset formam imitandi se; dicendum, quod etsi debeamus Deum imitari in aliquibus, non tamen nostrum est imitari in omnibus. Ad Deum enim spectat quaerere gloriam et vindictam, secundum quod dicitur ad Romanos duodecimop421-7: Mihi vindicta, et ego retribuam; ad nos autem non pertinet, quia nostrum non est iudica-

p. 422

re, sed iudicari; et ideo in hoc non debuit dare formam imitandi se. — Aliter posset dici, quod Deus exigendo satisfactionem magis praebuit nobis formam, quam si non exegisset. Praebuit enim exemplum et subditis et praelatis: subditis in hoc, quod remisit et pepercit; praelatis vero in hoc, quod emendam requisivit, ut decor iustitiae servaretur, quod spectat ad eos qui iudicant terram, secundum illud Sapientiae primop422-1: Diligite iustitiam qui iudicatis terram.

6. Ad illud quod ultimo obiicitur, quod decentius fuisset reparare genus humanum sine adiutorio humano, et ita sine satisfactionep422-2; dicendum, quod hoc falsum est. Summae enim bonitatis est communicare creaturae operationes nobiles, secundum quod ipsa nata est suscipere; et creatura aliquid potest facere in reparatione, quamvis solius Dei sit operari in primaria rerum productione, ubi non est operatio in aliquam materiam praeiacentemp422-3.

---

English Translation

Question II. Whether it was more fitting that the human race be repaired through satisfaction than by another way.

Secondly it is asked whether it is more fitting that the human race be repaired through satisfaction than by another way. And that it is so is shown through four suppositionsp419-1, of which the first is this: that way was more fitting for the repair of the human race in which the order of divine justice is more preserved. — The second is this: that way is more congruent to the repair of the human race in which the order of divine wisdom is more preserved. — The third is this: that way is more fitting to the repair of the human race in which the presidency of divine power is more preserved. — The fourth is this: that way is more fitting to the repair of the human race in which the honor of the divine majesty is more preserved.

1. These things being presupposed, one argues thus: the order of divine justice is more preserved when evil is punished than when it is left unpunished; but when the sinner is repaired through satisfaction, evil is punished; when without satisfaction, it is left unpunished: therefore the order of divine justice is more preserved in repair through satisfaction than without satisfaction: therefore by the first supposition this way is more fitting for repairing the human racep419-2.

2. Likewise, secondly one argues thus: the ordering of sinners in their punishments, or of sin in its penalty, manifests the beauty of divine wisdom, which does not allow the universe to be made base in any part of itself; but when the sinner is relieved through satisfaction, penalty follows upon fault; when, however, without satisfaction, the fault is not ordered through penalty: therefore the repair of the human race through satisfaction agrees more with divine wisdom than without it: therefore by the second supposition this way of repairing is more congruent and suitable in itselfp419-3.

3. Likewise, thirdly one argues thus: if evil were not punished and were left without any satisfaction, injustice would be subject to no law; and if this, divine power would not preside over all things;

but when satisfaction is exacted for sin, the sinner is subjected to penalty by the authority of divine justice: therefore in the mode of repairing the human race through satisfaction the presidency of divine power shines forth more than by another way: therefore by the third supposition this way is more congruentp420-1.

4. Likewise, fourthly one argues thus: the sinner, when he sins, dishonors God through transgressionp420-2: if, therefore, sin is remitted without satisfaction, sin is left without recompense for the honor taken away; but when satisfaction is rendered, the honor is recompensed: therefore in the mode of repairing man through satisfaction the honor of the divine majesty is more preserved than by another mode: therefore by the fourth supposition it is more fitting that the human race be repaired by this way of repair.

From these same reasons it can be concluded not only that this way is more congruent, but also that another cannot be congruent; nevertheless they are not as effective for proving the second as for proving the first, because besides thesep420-3 congruences others too can be found, although these are the more excellent.

On the contrary: 1. It more befits God to do what He does more for the showing of His kindness and mercy; but to remit all sins without any satisfaction of penalty, this is of greater mercy than to exact penalty from them: if, therefore, God is most merciful and most kind, so much so that one more kind cannot be conceived; it seems, therefore, that that mode of repairing which is apart from satisfaction would better agree with the divine excellencep420-4.

2. Likewise, that mode agrees more with the repair of the human race which is more indicative of the divine sufficiency; but if God so repaired the human race that He required no satisfaction, the divine sufficiency would appear more — for it would then be shown that He has no need of our amends and of our goodsp420-5 — therefore the mode of repairing without any satisfaction would be more fitting for the human race.

3. Likewise, that mode agrees more with human repair which is more indicative of the divine power, inasmuch as repair is a certain re-creationp420-6; but if God had repaired the human race by His word alone without any satisfaction, as He fashioned the world, there would be a greater display of divine power there: therefore this mode agrees more with the human race to be repaired.

4. Likewise, that mode agrees more with the repair of the human race in which man is more bound to loving and praising God; but if God had left man's fault to him without any satisfaction and penalty, He would be more to be loved and praised by man, for man would have received more from God: therefore such a mode would be more congruent to human repair.

5. Likewise, that mode is more congruent to the repair of the human race in which man is more instructed toward the carrying out of the divine command and the imitation of God; but man ought to remit and pardon another his fault and penaltyp420-7: therefore if God ought to give man an example of perfection, it seems that it would have more befitted God to repair the human race by releasing the whole than by exacting some satisfaction.

6. Likewise, that mode of repairing more befits God which is from God immediately than that which is from God by the mediating help of a creature — since, just as it befitted God to create more by Himself, so it seems more fitting to re-create by Himselfp420-8 — but repair through satisfaction is by the mediation of a satisfying creature: therefore it seems that it would have more befitted God to repair the human race without any satisfaction by Himself, than by means of satisfaction through a creature's help.

Conclusion.

It was more fitting, both on God's part and on our part, that the human race be repaired through satisfaction.

I respond: It must be said that without doubt it was more fitting that the human race be repaired through satisfaction than by another way, according to what Anselm and Augustine sayp420-9. And the reason for this is on God's part and on our part. On God's part, I say, because all the ways of the Lord are mercy and truthp420-10, since He is supremely just and merciful.

And therefore in the repair of the human race, which is the most excellent of God's ways, it is fitting that mercy run together with justice. And therefore it was becoming that God should exact satisfaction from man for the injury done to Him, and if man could not, then the divine mercy would come to his aid by giving him a mediator who would make satisfaction for him. And this mode was more fitting than another. For if God had not remitted the fault, but had exacted vengeance, His mercy would not be manifested; if, however, He had wholly remitted it and had not exacted satisfaction, justice would not be manifested. If, therefore, these two conditions are especially to be preserved in God's workp421-1, it was more fitting that human nature be repaired through satisfaction than by another way, on the part of the repairing God.

It was also more fitting on our part, inasmuch as our repair was for this, that it might lead us back from fault to justice, from misery to glory. As, therefore, when the human race fell through fault, it dishonored God through transgression and disordered delight; so, when it returns from fault to justice, it is becoming that it should honor God by enduring penalty, and in this it is more repaired to the norm of justice. Again, just as it is more glorious to acquire eternal life through merits than without meritsp421-2, so it is more glorious to be reconciled to God through satisfaction than without it. — The mode, therefore, of repairing through satisfaction agrees more with our justification and our glorification. If, therefore, these two are principally considered in the repair of the human race, it is plain that this mode of repairing is more fitting both on the part of the repairing God and on the part of the repaired human race. — Hence the reasons which show this are to be conceded.

1. To that which is objected concerning the manifestation of kindness and mercy, it must be said that the highest kindness and mercy in God do not exclude justice, and therefore it ought not to have been manifestedp421-3 in the work of repair in such a way that justice would have no place; but the divine mercy ought to have been manifested in such a way that together with this the divine justice would be shown. And this same thing was done when God repaired the human race through the death of His Son, where there was the greatest equity in exacting the price of so great a satisfaction, and the greatest kindness in handing over His only-begotten Son.

2. To that which is objected, that the divine sufficiency would be more manifestedp421-4 if He did not exact satisfaction; it must be said that, just as God exacts from us the observance of His commandments not on account of His own need, but on account of our ordering, by which we ought to obey Him as Lord: so too He exacts amends for sins, not because He has need, but that He may lead us back to the due ordering. And therefore that objection proceeded from a false supposition, when it was said that the divine sufficiency is more manifested without satisfaction.

3. To that which is objected, that another mode would more manifest the divine power; it must be said that, although in every work of God the divine power is shown, yet in the work of repair the kindness and mercy are more manifested, and consequently the justice itself joined to them. And therefore, since He could repair the human race by one word, He nevertheless preferred to repair it with difficulty and penalty, because it was more opportune that mercy rather than power be shown there. For power had shone forth sufficiently in the bringing-forth of things; but mercy still lay hidden, which God showed in the repair of manp421-5.

4. To that which is objected, that repair, with satisfaction set aside, would more bind us to praising and loving God; it must be said that this is false; for this binds us more to the love and praise of God, that He gave His Only-begotten for us, than if without this He had pardoned us both penalty and fault. For it was much greater that God should undergo death for us than that He should pardon our sins; it was also much greater, by giving us His Son, to pardon sins, than if He had simply pardoned sins. For He who did not spare His own Son, but handed Him over for us all, how has He not also with Him given us all things? as is said to the Romans, the eighth chapterp421-6. And so that is plain which proceeded from a false supposition.

5. To that which is objected, that if He had not exacted satisfaction, He would have offered more the form of imitating Himself; it must be said that, although we ought to imitate God in some things, yet it is not for us to imitate Him in all things. For to God it belongs to seek glory and vengeance, according to what is said to the Romans, the twelfth chapterp421-7: Vengeance is mine, and I will repay; but to us it does not pertain, because it is not for us to judge,

but to be judged; and therefore in this He ought not to have given the form of imitating Himself. — Otherwise it could be said that God, by exacting satisfaction, offered us the form more than if He had not exacted it. For He offered an example both to subjects and to prelates: to subjects in this, that He remitted and spared; to prelates indeed in this, that He required amends, that the beauty of justice might be preserved, which pertains to those who judge the earth, according to that of Wisdom, the first chapterp422-1: Love justice, you who judge the earth.

6. To that which is objected last, that it would have been more becoming to repair the human race without human help, and so without satisfactionp422-2; it must be said that this is false. For it is of the highest goodness to communicate noble operations to the creature, according as it is born to receive them; and the creature can do something in repair, although it belongs to God alone to operate in the primary production of things, where there is no operation upon any pre-existing matterp422-3.

---

Apparatus Criticus
  1. Quae elici possunt ex August., III. de Lib. Arb. c. 9. n. 24. seqq.; de Vera Relig. c. 40. n. 74. seqq.; de Natura boni, c. 7. seqq.; XIII. de Trin. c. 10. n. 13. seqq.; et ex Anselm., I. Cur Deus homo, c. 12. seqq.
    Which can be drawn from Augustine, On Free Choice III, c. 9, n. 24 ff.; On True Religion c. 40, n. 74 ff.; On the Nature of the Good, c. 7 ff.; On the Trinity XIII, c. 10, n. 13 ff.; and from Anselm, Why God Became Man I, c. 12 ff.
  2. Anselm. loc. in praeced. nota cit. dicit: Dimittere peccatum non est aliud quam non punire; et quoniam recte ordinare peccatum sine satisfactione non est nisi punire, si non punitur, inordinatum dimittitur... Deum vero non decet aliquid in suo regno inordinatum dimittere. Cfr. tom. II. pag. 458, nota 6. et pag. 967, nota 3. — In minori pro peccator reparatur cod. U peccatum reparatur, cod. F peccator vel peccatum reparatur, edd. peccata reparantur.
    Anselm, in the place cited in the preceding note, says: To remit sin is nothing other than not to punish; and since rightly to order sin without satisfaction is nothing but to punish, if it is not punished, the disordered thing is dismissed... But it does not befit God to leave anything disordered in His kingdom. Cf. tom. II, p. 458, note 6, and p. 967, note 3. — In the minor, for peccator reparatur cod. U has peccatum reparatur, cod. F peccator vel peccatum reparatur, the editions peccata reparantur.
  3. Anselm. loc. cit. c. 15. ait: Ipsa namque perversitatis spontanea satisfactio, vel a non satisfaciente poenae exactio; excepto hoc, quod Deus de malis multimodis bona facit; in eadem universitate locum tenent suum et ordinis pulcritudinem. Quas si divina sapientia, ubi perversitas rectum ordinem perturbare nititur, non adderet, fieret in ipsa universitate, quam Deus debet ordinare, quaedam ex violata ordinis pulcritudine deformitas, et Deus in sua dispositione videretur deficere. Quae duo quoniam, sicut sunt inconvenientia, ita sunt impossibilia; necesse est, ut omne peccatum satisfactio, aut poena sequatur. Cfr. tom. II. pag. 760, nota 1.
    Anselm, in the place cited, c. 15, says: For the spontaneous satisfaction of perversity itself, or the exaction of penalty from one who does not satisfy; excepting this, that God in manifold ways makes good things out of evils; hold their own place and the beauty of order in the same universe. If divine wisdom did not add these where perversity strives to disturb the right order, there would arise in the universe itself, which God ought to order, a certain deformity from the violated beauty of order, and God would seem to fail in His ordering. Since these two, just as they are unfitting, so are they impossible; it is necessary that either satisfaction or penalty follow upon every sin. Cf. tom. II, p. 760, note 1.
  4. Anselm., loc. cit. c. 12. dicit, quod, si peccatum dimitteretur impunitum, etiam haec tria inconvenientia sequerentur, scil. quod «similiter erit apud Deum peccanti et non peccanti, quod Deo non convenit»; peccatum nulli legi subiaceret, «liberior igitur est iniustitia, si sola misericordia dimittitur quam iustitia, quod valde inconveniens videtur»; et iniustitia esset similis Deo, «quia sicut Deus nullius legi subiacet, ita et iniustitia». — Pro praelucet codd. A K P Q bb relucet.
    Anselm, in the place cited, c. 12, says that, if sin were dismissed unpunished, these three unfitting things too would follow, namely that «it will be alike with God for the one sinning and the one not sinning, which does not befit God»; sin would be subject to no law, «injustice therefore is freer, if it is dismissed by mercy alone than justice, which seems very unfitting»; and injustice would be like God, «because just as God is subject to no one's law, so too injustice». — For praelucet codd. A K P Q bb have relucet.
  5. Respicitur illud Rom. 2, 23: Qui in Lege gloriaris per praevaricationem Legis Deum inhonoras. — Anselm., loc. cit. c. 13: Necesse est ergo, ut aut ablatus honor solvatur, aut poena sequatur; alioquin aut sibi ipsi Deus iustus non erit, aut ad utrumque impotens erit, quod nefas est vel cogitare.
    There is regard to that of Rom. 2:23: You who glory in the Law, through transgression of the Law dishonor God. — Anselm, in the place cited, c. 13: It is necessary therefore that either the honor taken away be paid back, or that penalty follow; otherwise either God will not be just to Himself, or He will be powerless for both, which it is wicked even to think.
  6. Vat., omisso quia, hic addit etiam.
    The Vatican edition, omitting quia, here adds etiam.
  7. Anselm., loc. cit. c. 12, graviores ex obiectionibus hic propositis breviter complectitur his verbis: Cum Deus sic sit liber, ut nulli legi, nullius subiaceat iudicio; et sit ita benignus, ut nihil benignius cogitari queat; et nihil sit rectum aut decens, nisi quod ipse vult: mirum videtur, si dicimus, quia nullatenus vult aut non ei licet iniuriam suam dimittere, a quo etiam de his quas aliis facimus, solemus indulgentiam petere. — In minori pro ab illis edd. pro illis. Deinde pro praeter satisfactionem codd. P Q praeter omnem satisfactionem.
    Anselm, in the place cited, c. 12, briefly comprises the weightier of the objections here proposed in these words: Since God is so free that He is subject to no law, to no one's judgment; and is so kind that nothing kinder can be conceived; and nothing is right or becoming except what He wills: it seems strange if we say that He in no way wills, or that it is not lawful for Him, to dismiss His own injury, from whom even for those things we do to others we are accustomed to ask indulgence. — In the minor, for ab illis the editions have pro illis. Then for praeter satisfactionem codd. P Q have praeter omnem satisfactionem.
  8. Respicitur illud Psalm. 15, 2: Deus meus es tu, quoniam bonorum meorum non eges. — Edd. indigeret.
    There is regard to that of Ps. 15:2: You are my God, for You have no need of my goods. — The editions have indigeret.
  9. Cfr. supra pag. 30, nota 5.
    Cf. above, p. 30, note 5.
  10. Vide Matth. 6, 12. seqq. — Subinde in codd. desideratur Deum. In fine arg. pro exigendo cod. F exhibendo.
    See Matt. 6:12 ff. — Thereupon in the codices Deum is lacking. At the end of the argument, for exigendo cod. F has exhibendo.
  11. Cfr. supra pag. 28, nota 2. — Cod. D reparare pro recreare.
    Cf. above, p. 28, note 2. — Cod. D has reparare for recreare.
  12. Anselm., I. Cur Deus homo, c. 12. seqq.; August., XIII. de Trin. c. 10. n. 13. seqq. Cfr. etiam Bernard., Tract. de erroribus Abaelardi c. 6. n. 15. seq.
    Anselm, Why God Became Man I, c. 12 ff.; Augustine, On the Trinity XIII, c. 10, n. 13 ff. Cf. also Bernard, Treatise on the Errors of Abelard c. 6, n. 15 f.
  13. Psalm. 24, 10.
    Ps. 24:10.
  14. Cfr. Anselm., Proslog. c. 11, et IV. Sent. d. 46. a. 2. — Paulo ante edd. voci iustitia praefigunt eius. Paulo inferius pro ex parte nostri cod. V ex parte nostra.
    Cf. Anselm, Proslogion c. 11, and IV Sentences d. 46, a. 2. — A little before, the editions prefix eius to the word iustitia. A little below, for ex parte nostri cod. V has ex parte nostra.
  15. Vide supra pag. 387, nota 4. — Vat. hic supplet eam acquirere.
    See above, p. 387, note 4. — The Vatican edition here supplies eam acquirere.
  16. Cod. O hic repetit misericordia. — De principio, cui S. Anselm. innititur solvens obiectionem, vide supra pag. 267, nota 5.
    Cod. O here repeats misericordia. — On the principle on which St. Anselm relies in solving the objection, see above, p. 267, note 5.
  17. Non pauci codd. manifestatur. Aliquanto inferius pro sic et peccatorum cod. Z sic et a peccatore.
    Not a few codices have manifestatur. Somewhat below, for sic et peccatorum cod. Z has sic et a peccatore.
  18. Cfr. Bernard., Serm. I. in Nativ. Domini, n. 2, ubi inter alia egregie dicta: Apparuerat ante potentia in rerum creatione; apparebat sapientia in earum gubernatione; sed benignitas misericordiae nunc maxime apparuit in humanitate: Serm. in fer. IV. hebdom. sanctae, n. 13; Serm. 29. de Diversis, n. 3; Serm. II. in Cantic. n. 7.
    Cf. Bernard, Sermon I on the Nativity of the Lord, n. 2, where among other excellent sayings: Power had appeared before in the creation of things; wisdom appeared in their governance; but the kindness of mercy now appeared most fully in the humanity: Sermon for Wednesday of Holy Week, n. 13; Sermon 29 on Diverse Matters, n. 3; Sermon II on the Canticle, n. 7.
  19. Vers. 32. — Paulo superius pro quam peccata codd. A Z bb quam quod peccata.
    Verse 32. — A little above, for quam peccata codd. A Z bb have quam quod peccata.
  20. Vers. 19. — Anselm., I. Cur Deus homo, c. 12: Deus hoc [dimittere peccantibus in nos] praecipit nobis, ut non praesumamus quod solius Dei est. Ad nullum enim pertinet vindictam facere, nisi ad illum qui Dominus est omnium; nam cum terrenae potestates hoc recte faciunt, ipse facit Deus, a quo ad hoc ipsum sunt ordinatae. — Paulo superius pro non tamen nostrum est codd. M O non tamen necesse [edd. 1, 2 necessarium] est.
    Verse 19. — Anselm, Why God Became Man I, c. 12: God commands this [to remit to those who sin against us] to us, that we may not presume what belongs to God alone. For to no one does it belong to take vengeance, except to Him who is Lord of all; for when earthly powers do this rightly, God Himself does it, by whom they are ordained for this very thing. — A little above, for non tamen nostrum est codd. M O have non tamen necesse [editions 1, 2 necessarium] est.
  21. Vers. 1.
    Verse 1.
  22. Edd. satisfactore. — Cfr. II. Sent. d. 1. p. I. a. 2. q. 2. ad 1.
    The editions have satisfactore. — Cf. II Sentences d. 1, p. I, a. 2, q. 2, ad 1.
  23. Vide scholion ad praecedentem quaest.
    See the scholion to the preceding question.
← Dist. 20, Art. 1, Q. 1Dist. 20, Art. 1, Q. 3→