← Back to Distinction 3

Dist. 3, Part 1, Art. 1, Q. 3

Book III: On the Incarnation of the Word · Distinction 3

Textus Latinus
English Translation
p. 70

Quaestio III. Utrum beata Virgo sanctificata fuerit ante nativitatem.

Tertio quaeritur, utrum beata Virgo sanctificata fuerit ante nativitatem. Et quod sic, videtur.

1. Bernardus ad Lugdunenses1: « Fuit procul dubio Mater Dei ante sancta quam nata ».

2. Item, Bernardus2: « Quod paucis mortalium constat esse collatum, fas certe non est credere tantae Virgini fuisse negatum »; sed Ioannes et Ieremias sanctificati fuerunt in utero, secundum quod habetur Ieremiae primo: Antequam exires etc.; et Lucae primo: Spiritu sancto replebitur adhuc ex utero matris suae: ergo videtur multo fortius, quod Virgo Maria fuerit in utero sanctificata.

3. Item, Ecclesia celebrat et solemnizat Virginis nativitatem; sed statui in peccato solemnitas non debetur: ergo videtur, quod in hora nativitatis fuerit sanctificata3.

4. Item, si aliqua persona de plenitudine gratiae Filii beatae Virginis4 debuit participare, Mater eius maxime particeps debuit fieri: ergo sicut tunc maxime erat idonea, ut cum ipsa et in ipsa gratia augmentaretur, cum eam gestabat inter viscera; videtur, quod in ipso utero Spiritus sancti gratia fuisset repleta.

Sed contra: 1. Ad Romanos octavo5: Ut sit ipse primogenitus; Glossa: « Quia primus sine peccato natus et primus impassibilis resurgens »: ergo videtur, quod beata Virgo non fuerit nata sine peccato, cum nata fuerit ante quam Christus: ergo non fuit sanctificata ante quam nata.

2. Item, Augustinus ad Dardanum6: « Illa gratia, qua efficimur templum Dei singuli, non nisi renatorum est, quod non nisi nati homines esse possunt »: ergo cum per sanctificationem beata Virgo sit facta templum Dei, non fuit ante sancta quam nata.

3. Item, nulla proprietas perimitur, quamdiu habet continuitatem cum sua causa; sed anima contrahit originale a parentibus7: ergo quamdiu proles iuncta est matri, non videtur, quod ab originali peccato possit mundari: ergo nec sanctificari.

4. Item, esse ordinatum praesupponit esse distinctum8; sed gratia sanctificationis praesupponit esse distinctum: ergo nulli potest conferri nisi habenti esse discretum: ergo quamdiu proles coniuncta est matri, non videtur posse sanctificari.

5. Item, sanctificari in utero est effectus cognitus soli Deo, ergo de nullo Sancto asserendum est esse sanctificatum in utero, nisi de eo, de quo expresse legitur in Scriptura tradita a Spiritu sancto; sed hoc non legitur de Virgine: ergo etc.

6. Iuxta hoc quaeritur: quare potius exprimitur in Scriptura sanctificatio Ieremiae et Ioannis Baptistae quam alterius Sancti? — Et si tu dicas, quod illi fuerunt soli sanctificati; tunc est quaestio, unde hoc sit, cum multi fuerint Sancti tam in novo quam in veteri Testamento, et sanctitatis valde eminentis.

Conclusio

Beata Virgo fuit in utero et ante nativitatem sanctificata.

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod pro indubitanti habet hoc Ecclesia, videlicet quod beata Virgo fuerit in utero sanctificata. Et illud patet ex hoc, quod eius nativitatem tota Ecclesia celebrat, quod non faceret, nisi sanctificata esset.

p. 71Si autem quaeratur, qua die vel hora sanctificata fuerit, hoc ignoratur; probabiliter tamen creditur, quod cito post infusionem animae fuerit facta infusio gratiae. — Quidquid tamen sit de hora, pro certo9 habendum est, quod ante nativitatem sanctificata fuerit. Licet enim hoc expresse non habeatur in Scriptura, haberi tamen potest ex his quae in Scriptura leguntur. In Scriptura namque non legitur, quia, cum Evangelia inchoentur10 a Ioanne, qui fuit consummatio Prophetarum et initium Legis novae; et beata Virgo nata et concepta fuit ante Ioannem; ideo nihil habetur de eius nativitate, vel sanctificatione in Evangeliis. — Habetur tamen11 in novo, sive in veteri Testamento, unde sanctificatio eius potest elici. In novo habetur de sanctificatione Ioannis, in veteri de sanctificatione Ieremiae; quorum uterque legitur in utero fuisse sanctificatus. Et ex hoc quasi a minori colligitur, hoc beatae Virgini fuisse concessum; quia, sicut dicit Bernardus, « quod aliis legitur fuisse collatum, non est credendum Virgini fuisse negatum », maxime cum sanctitas Virginis excedat Ieremiae et Ioannis puritatem et virginitatem12. In aliis fuit virginitas, in hac cum virginitate fecunditas. Et si illi sanctificati fuerunt in utero, quia ad Sanctum Sanctorum secundum expressionem prophetiae accesserunt magis, quanto magis illa in utero sanctificari debuit, quae Deum in utero portavit? Ioannes namque inter ceteros de Domino prophetavit, quia in matris utero ad adventum Domini exsultavit, et postmodum suo digito ostendit13. Ieremias etiam prius Ioanne expressius prophetavit, cum dixit: Novum faciet Dominus super terram, mulier circumdabit virum, trigesimo primo. In hoc namque quod dicit: Novum faciet Dominus super terram, datur intelligi, quod non ex virili semine; et quod ille quem circumdabit, non erat purus homo, quia neutrum esset novum. Et in hoc totum comprehendit, quod dicit Isaias14: Ecce Virgo concipiet etc. In hoc autem quod subiungit: Et circumdabit virum, dat intelligere, Christum ab instanti conceptionis fuisse perfectum gratia et sapientia. — Prophetavit nihilominus facto; quasi enim15 omnia gesta sua signa fuerunt dominicae passionis. — Et propterea de his duobus legitur specialiter, quod fuerunt sanctificati; et per hos duos datur manifeste intelligi sanctificatio beatae Virginis.

Si quis autem velit dicere, quod aliis Sanctis convenit sanctificatio ex utero, ut Iob, qui dicit16: Ab infantia crevit mecum miseratio et ex utero egressa est mecum, et sicut volunt quidam dicere de Iacob et David; hoc nec certitudinem habet nec auctoritatem apertam, nisi quis velit Scripturae facere violentiam. Et ideo eadem facilitate contemnitur, qua probatur; et nec aliis videtur fuisse nisi virginibus haec gratia sanctificationis concessa. — Concedendum est igitur, Reginam Virginum ex utero fuisse sanctificatam. Et rationes, quae hoc ostendunt, concedendae sunt.

p. 72Ad 1. 2. Ad illud quod obiicitur in contrarium de Glossa et Augustino, dicendum, quod est nativitas duplex, scilicet nativitas in utero, et nativitas ex utero. Nativitas in utero est ex coniunctione animae cum carne; nativitas ex utero est ex egressu prolis de ventre17. Verbum igitur de Glossa et auctoritate Augustini intelligitur de nativitate in utero, non de nativitate ex utero. In illa enim nativitate in utero fit originalis contractio, et post illam potest esse sanctificatio. — Posset tamen dici, quod illud verbum Augustini intelligitur de gratia regenerante secundum legem communem. Et hoc melius patet in libro quarto18, distinctione sexta.

Ad 3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod non perimitur proprietas, quamdiu coniuncta est cum sua origine; dicendum, quod verum est de illa proprietate, quae habet conservari cum continua influentia cum sua causa19. Talis autem non habet esse in proposito; et ideo non habet hic locum.

Ad 4. Ad illud, quod esse ordinatum praesupponit esse distinctum; dicendum, quod verum est; sed ex hoc non sequitur, gratiam sanctificantem sequi nativitatem carnalem, pro eo quod ante nativitatem carnalem proles distinguitur et quantum ad animam et quantum ad corpus; licet illa distinctio ante nativitatem ex utero oculis corporeis20 non propaletur.

Ad 5. 6. Ad illa duo ultima, quae obiiciebantur, iam patet responsio per ea quae dicta sunt21.

---

p. 70

Question III. Whether the Blessed Virgin was sanctified before her birth.

Thirdly it is asked whether the Blessed Virgin was sanctified before her birth. And that she was, it seems.

1. Bernard, to the people of Lyons1: « She who was the Mother of God was beyond doubt holy before she was born ».

2. Likewise, Bernard2: « What is acknowledged to have been granted to few mortals, it is surely not right to believe was denied to so great a Virgin »; but John and Jeremiah were sanctified in the womb, according to what is had in Jeremiah, chapter one: Before you came forth etc.; and in Luke, chapter one: He shall be filled with the Holy Spirit even from his mother's womb: therefore it seems much more strongly that the Virgin Mary was sanctified in the womb.

3. Likewise, the Church celebrates and solemnizes the Virgin's birth; but a solemnity is not owed to a condition under sin: therefore it seems that she was sanctified at the hour of her birth3.

4. Likewise, if any person was to share in the fullness of grace of the Son of the Blessed Virgin4, His Mother most of all ought to have been made a partaker: therefore, since she was then most fit that grace should be increased with her and in her, when she carried Him within her womb, it seems that she would have been filled with the grace of the Holy Spirit in that very womb.

On the contrary: 1. To the Romans, chapter eight5: That He might be the firstborn; the Gloss: « Because He was the first born without sin and the first to rise impassible »: therefore it seems that the Blessed Virgin was not born without sin, since she was born before Christ: therefore she was not sanctified before she was born.

2. Likewise, Augustine, to Dardanus6: « That grace, by which we are each made the temple of God, belongs only to the reborn, which only those who are born can be »: therefore, since by sanctification the Blessed Virgin was made the temple of God, she was not holy before she was born.

3. Likewise, no property is destroyed so long as it has continuity with its cause; but the soul contracts original [sin] from its parents7: therefore, so long as the offspring is joined to the mother, it does not seem that it can be cleansed from original sin: therefore neither can it be sanctified.

4. Likewise, ordered being presupposes distinct being8; but the grace of sanctification presupposes distinct being: therefore it can be conferred on none except one having discrete being: therefore, so long as the offspring is joined to the mother, it does not seem able to be sanctified.

5. Likewise, to be sanctified in the womb is an effect known to God alone, therefore it is to be asserted of no Saint that he was sanctified in the womb, except of one of whom it is expressly read in Scripture handed down by the Holy Spirit; but this is not read of the Virgin: therefore etc.

6. In connection with this it is asked: why is the sanctification of Jeremiah and John the Baptist expressed in Scripture rather than that of some other Saint? — And if you say that they alone were sanctified; then it is a question whence this is, since there were many Saints both in the new and in the old Testament, and of very eminent holiness.

Conclusio

The Blessed Virgin was sanctified in the womb and before her birth.

I respond: It must be said that the Church holds this as beyond doubt, namely that the Blessed Virgin was sanctified in the womb. And this is clear from this, that the whole Church celebrates her birth, which it would not do unless she had been sanctified.

p. 71But if it is asked on what day or at what hour she was sanctified, this is unknown; yet it is probably believed that soon after the infusion of the soul the infusion of grace took place. — Yet whatever may be the case regarding the hour, it must be held for certain9 that she was sanctified before her birth. For although this is not expressly had in Scripture, it can nonetheless be had from those things which are read in Scripture. For in Scripture it is not read, because, since the Gospels begin10 from John, who was the consummation of the Prophets and the beginning of the new Law; and the Blessed Virgin was born and conceived before John; therefore nothing is had concerning her birth or sanctification in the Gospels. — It is had, nonetheless11, in the new, or in the old Testament, whence her sanctification can be drawn out. In the new there is found the sanctification of John, in the old the sanctification of Jeremiah; both of whom are read to have been sanctified in the womb. And from this it is gathered as it were from the lesser that this was granted to the Blessed Virgin; because, as Bernard says, « what is read to have been conferred on others is not to be believed to have been denied to the Virgin », especially since the holiness of the Virgin exceeds the purity and virginity of Jeremiah and John12. In the others there was virginity, in her, fecundity together with virginity. And if they were sanctified in the womb, because they drew nearer to the Holy of Holies according to the expression of prophecy, how much more ought she to be sanctified in the womb who carried God in her womb? For John among the rest prophesied of the Lord, because in his mother's womb he leaped at the coming of the Lord, and afterward pointed Him out with his finger13. Jeremiah too prophesied more expressly before John, when he said: The Lord will create a new thing upon the earth, a woman shall compass a man, in chapter thirty-one. For in this, that he says: The Lord will create a new thing upon the earth, it is given to be understood that it was not from male seed; and that He whom she shall compass was not pure man, since neither would be a new thing. And in this he comprehends all that Isaiah says14: Behold, a Virgin shall conceive etc. But in this, that he adds: And she shall compass a man, he gives to understand that Christ from the instant of His conception was perfect in grace and wisdom. — He prophesied nonetheless by deed; for as it were15 all his deeds were signs of the Lord's Passion. — And therefore concerning these two it is read in particular that they were sanctified; and through these two the sanctification of the Blessed Virgin is given manifestly to be understood.

But if anyone should wish to say that sanctification from the womb belongs to other Saints, as to Job, who says16: From my infancy mercy grew up with me, and it came out with me from the womb, and as certain ones wish to say of Jacob and David; this has neither certitude nor open authority, unless one wishes to do violence to Scripture. And therefore it is rejected with the same ease with which it is proved; and to none others does this grace of sanctification seem to have been granted except to virgins. — It must therefore be conceded that the Queen of Virgins was sanctified from the womb. And the reasons which show this are to be conceded.

p. 72To 1 and 2. To that which is objected to the contrary from the Gloss and Augustine, it must be said that birth is twofold, namely birth in the womb, and birth from the womb. Birth in the womb is from the joining of the soul with the flesh; birth from the womb is from the going-forth of the offspring from the belly17. The saying, therefore, of the Gloss and the authority of Augustine is understood of birth in the womb, not of birth from the womb. For in that birth in the womb the original contraction takes place, and after it there can be sanctification. — Yet it could be said that that saying of Augustine is understood of regenerating grace according to the common law. And this is better made clear in the fourth book18, distinction six.

To 3. To that which is objected, that a property is not destroyed so long as it is joined with its origin; it must be said that this is true of that property which is preserved by a continuous influence from its cause19. But such a one has no being in the matter at hand; and therefore it has no place here.

To 4. To that, that ordered being presupposes distinct being; it must be said that this is true; but from this it does not follow that sanctifying grace follows carnal birth, for the reason that before carnal birth the offspring is distinguished both as to soul and as to body; although that distinction before birth from the womb is not made manifest to bodily eyes20.

To 5 and 6. To those last two which were objected, the response is now clear through the things which have been said21.

---

Apparatus Criticus
  1. 1
    Epist. 174. n. 5. — Complures codd. omittunt paulo ante videtur.
    Letter 174, n. 5. — Many codices omit the videtur a little before.
  2. 2
    Loc. cit., ubi textus originalis sic sonat: « Quod itaque vel paucis mortalium constat fuisse collatum, fas certe non est suspicari tantae Virgini esse negatum ». Pro constat edd. in ortu congruit, nonnulli codd. conveniat. — Seq. locus Scripturae est Ierem. 1, 5; alter Luc. 1, 15.
    Loc. cit., where the original text reads thus: « What therefore is acknowledged to have been conferred even on few mortals, it is surely not right to suspect was denied to so great a Virgin ». For constat [is acknowledged] the editions read in ortu congruit, several codices conveniat. — The following Scripture passage is Jeremiah 1:5; the other Luke 1:15.
  3. 3
    Bernard., loc. cit. n. 3: Accepi sane ab Ecclesia, illum diem cum summa veneratione recolendum, quo assumta de saeculo nequam... sed et ortum Virginis didici nihilominus in Ecclesia et ab Ecclesia indubitanter habere festivum atque sanctum, firmissime cum Ecclesia sentiens, in utero eam accepisse, ut sancta prodiret.
    Bernard, loc. cit. n. 3: I have indeed received from the Church that that day is to be recalled with the highest veneration on which, taken up from the wicked world... but I have learned no less in the Church and from the Church that the Virgin's birth is indubitably held to be festive and holy, judging most firmly with the Church that she conceived in the womb [grace], that she might come forth holy.
  4. 4
    Ioan. 1, 16: Et de plenitudine eius nos omnes accepimus et gratiam pro gratia. — Pro gratiae Filii beatae Virginis codd. li aa cum edd. 1, 2 gratiae Christi, cod. H gratiae Dei, codd. A F G L N T U V Z perperam gratiae beatae Virginis. Mox pro ergo sicut codd. K L Z bb ergo si; deinde pro eam gestabat [scil. plenitudinem gratiae] edd. eum gestabat.
    John 1:16: And of His fullness we all have received, and grace for grace. — For of the grace of the Son of the Blessed Virgin codices li, aa with editions 1, 2 read of the grace of Christ, codex H of the grace of God, codices A F G L N T U V Z wrongly of the grace of the Blessed Virgin. Then for ergo sicut codices K L Z bb read ergo si; next for she carried Him [namely, the fullness of grace] the editions read eum gestabat.
  5. 5
    Vers. 29. — Glossa est ordinaria et habetur apud Strabum et Lyranum. — Pro primus impassibilis edd. cum pluribus codd. primo impassibilis.
    Verse 29. — The Gloss is the ordinary one and is found in Strabo and Lyra. — For primus impassibilis the editions with many codices read primo impassibilis.
  6. 6
    Epist. 187. (alias 57.) c. 10. n. 32: Illa sanctificatio, qua efficimur et singuli templa Dei et in unum omnes templum Dei, non est nisi renatorum, quod nisi nati homines esse non possunt. — Pro singuli Vat. singulare et subinde pro quod cum edd. 1, 2 quia. In fine arg. pro sancta Vat. sanctificata.
    Letter 187 (alias 57), c. 10, n. 32: That sanctification by which we are made both individually temples of God and all together one temple of God, belongs only to the reborn, which they cannot be unless men born. — For singuli the Vatican [edition] reads singulare, and likewise for quod the editions 1, 2 read quia. At the end of the argument, for sancta the Vatican reads sanctificata.
  7. 7
    Cfr. II. Sent. d. 31. a. 2. q. 1. seqq. et d. 33. a. 1. q. 1. — Paulo superius pro continuitatem codd. F G K M Z bb continuationem. Mox pro iuncta codd. A Z unita.
    Cf. II Sent., d. 31, a. 2, q. 1 ff. and d. 33, a. 1, q. 1. — A little above, for continuitatem codices F G K M Z bb read continuationem. Then for iuncta codices A Z read unita.
  8. 8
    Nam secundum August., XIX. de Civ. Dei, c. 13. n. 1, ordo est parium dispariumque rerum sua cuique loca tribuens dispositio. — Pro esse distinctum in minori cod. aa et Vat. exhibent esse ordinatum. — Satis manifestum est, quod concinnior lectio sit ex istis duabus in unam contracta: sed gratia sanctificationis praesupponit esse ordinatum et per consequens esse distinctum.
    For according to Augustine, On the City of God XIX, c. 13, n. 1, order is the arrangement of equal and unequal things assigning to each its own place. — For distinct being in the minor [premise] codex aa and the Vatican exhibit ordered being. — It is sufficiently manifest that the more elegant reading is one contracted from these two into one: but the grace of sanctification presupposes ordered being and consequently distinct being.
  9. 9
    Codd. K P Q Z bb adnectunt tamen.
    Codices K P Q Z bb append tamen.
  10. 10
    Cod. A Evangelista inchoetur. Proxime post pro qui fuit codd. A G H L T V Z aa quia fuit, cod. U pro eo quod fuerit. Dein pro initium cod. X inchoatio et paulo inferius pro concepta fuit codd. F G L N U V aa bb concepta fuerit.
    Codex A reads Evangelista inchoetur. Immediately after, for qui fuit codices A G H L T V Z aa read quia fuit, codex U pro eo quod fuerit. Then for initium codex X reads inchoatio, and a little below for concepta fuit codices F G L N U V aa bb read concepta fuerit.
  11. 11
    Codd. K P Q bb subiiciunt aliquid. In cod. A legitur: Habetur tam in novo quam in veteri etc. Aliquantulum inferius ante beatae Virgini cod. G interserit vere.
    Codices K P Q bb subjoin aliquid. In codex A is read: Habetur tam in novo quam in veteri etc. Somewhat below, before to the Blessed Virgin codex G inserts vere.
  12. 12
    Cod. T maxime cum Virgo Ieremiam et Ioannem in sanctitate excellat. Paulo inferius post accesserunt edd. omittunt magis, et subinde pro quanto magis cod. A substituit tanto magis.
    Codex T reads especially since the Virgin excels Jeremiah and John in holiness. A little below, after they drew nearer the editions omit more, and likewise for how much more codex A substitutes so much more.
  13. 13
    Luc. 1, 41; Ioan. 1, 29. et 36. — Seq. Script. locus est Ierem. 31, 22, cuius expositio a Bonav. proposita convenit cum explanatione Hieronymi et cum verbis Bernardi in eius Homil. 2. super Missus est, n. 9. — Paulo superius ante de Domino prophetavit edd. interiiciunt expressius et mox pro ad adventum substituunt de adventu.
    Luke 1:41; John 1:29 and 36. — The following Scripture passage is Jeremiah 31:22, whose exposition proposed by Bonaventure agrees with Jerome's explanation and with Bernard's words in his Homily 2 on Missus est, n. 9. — A little above, before prophesied of the Lord the editions interject more expressly, and presently for at the coming substitute concerning the coming.
  14. 14
    Cap. 7, 14. — Paulo superius codd. A H et edd. 1, 2 prius pro purus.
    Chapter 7:14. — A little above, codices A H and editions 1, 2 read prius for purus.
  15. 15
    Pro quasi enim cod. K quia. Paulo inferius pro et per hos duos cod. T ex quibus.
    For quasi enim codex K reads quia. A little below, for and through these two codex T reads ex quibus.
  16. 16
    Cap. 31, 18. — De Iacob vide Gen. 25, 23; Malach. 1, 2, et Rom. 9, 13. De David loquitur Bernard., Epist. 174. n. 3: Videris, inquit, etiam tu, an de sancto David id ipsum liceat opinari, pro eo quod dicebat Deo: In te, ait, confirmatus sum ex utero, de ventre matris meae tu es protector meus (Ps. 70, 6.); item: De ventre matris meae Deus meus es tu, ne discesseris a me (Ps. 21, 11.). — Loco vocum et David, quae in codd. A E H L N W X aperte habetur, edd. exhibent dicendum quod, quae corruptio ex abbreviata voce David videtur esse orta; alii codd. praemittunt et ante dicendum. Paulo superius pro sanctificatio ex utero Vat. cum uno alteroque cod. sanctificatio in utero, quod et recurrit in fine corp. Cod. T omittit nisi quis velit Scripturae facere violentiam et etiam verba et nec aliis... concessa.
    Chapter 31:18. — On Jacob see Gen. 25:23; Malachi 1:2, and Rom. 9:13. Of David, Bernard speaks, Letter 174, n. 3: See, he says, whether you too may opine the very same of holy David, in that he said to God: In you, he says, I have been confirmed from the womb, from my mother's belly you are my protector (Ps. 70:6); likewise: From my mother's belly you are my God, depart not from me (Ps. 21:11). — In place of the words et David, which is openly had in codices A E H L N W X, the editions exhibit dicendum quod, which corruption seems to have arisen from the abbreviated word David; other codices place et before dicendum. A little above, for sanctification from the womb the Vatican with one or another codex reads sanctification in the womb, which also recurs at the end of the body. Codex T omits unless one wishes to do violence to Scripture and also the words and to none others... granted.
  17. 17
    Cfr. August., Epist. 187. (alias 57.) c. 10. n. 33. — Edd. est egressus prolis de ventre.
    Cf. Augustine, Letter 187 (alias 57), c. 10, n. 33. — The editions read est egressus prolis de ventre [it is the going-forth of the offspring from the belly].
  18. 18
    Part. II. a. 1. q. 1.
    Part II, a. 1, q. 1.
  19. 19
    Exemplum affert August., VIII. de Gen. ad lit. c. 12. n. 26: Sicut aer praesente lumine non factus est lucidus, sed fit; quia, si factus esset, non autem fieret, etiam absente lumine lucidus maneret. — Cod. K in sua causa. Paulo superius pro cum sua origine cod. Z cum sua causa. Paulo inferius pro habet esse Vat. potest esse.
    Augustine gives the example, On Genesis to the Letter VIII, c. 12, n. 26: Just as the air, when light is present, was not made bright but is being made bright; because, if it had been made [bright] and were not being made, it would remain bright even when light is absent. — Codex K reads in sua causa. A little above, for with its origin codex Z reads with its cause. A little below, for habet esse the Vatican reads potest esse.
  20. 20
    Cod. T omittit corporeis, pro quo cod. K corporis, codd. W X carnis.
    Codex T omits corporeis [bodily], for which codex K reads corporis [of the body], codices W X carnis [of the flesh].
  21. 21
    Cod. T Ad duo ultima patet responsio ex iam dictis. — Vide scholion ad praecedentem quaest.
    Codex T reads To the last two the response is clear from what has already been said. — See the scholion to the preceding question.
← Dist. 3, Part 1, Art. 1, Q. 2Dist. 3, Part 1, Art. 2, Q. 1→