Bonaventure — Opera Omnia

Dist. 16, Part 2, Dubia

Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 16

Textus Latinus

p. 411

DUBIA CIRCA LITTERAM MAGISTRI.

Dub. I

In parte ista sunt dubitationes circa litteram, et primo quaeritur de ista divisione, quam ponit Magister in littera, quod tribus modis agitur poenitentia, utrum sit poenitentiae-virtutis, an poenitentiae-Sacramenti. Et videtur, quod non virtutis, quia haec simplex est et species specialissima¹. — Item, quod nec Sacramenti: quia, multiplicato superiori, multiplicatur inferius²: ergo secundum hoc videtur, quod poenitentia secundum tres differentias sit triplex Sacramentum. Praeterea, «omne Sacramentum, ut dicit Ambrosius, simplex est».

p. 412

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod poenitentia, quae est ante baptismum, est poenitentia-virtus, non poenitentia-Sacramentum; et poenitentia, quae est post baptismum, est poenitentia-Sacramentum; et ideo poenitentia in hac divisione accipitur communiter ad virtutem et Sacramentum; nec est dictum aequivoce, sed analogice per reductionem ad unam naturam³. — Ulterius notandum, quod partes istae non sunt diversificantes poenitentiam essentialiter, sed secundum statum; et ideo non est divisio in partes essentiales, nec oportet ex hoc Sacramentum multiplicari nec esse compositum. Et sic patet illud⁴.

Dub. II

Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit, quod poenitentia fit pro peccatis, quae Legis decalogus continet. Videtur enim non bene dicere, quia in decalogo non prohibetur superbia nec hypocrisis nec consimilia: ergo pro his non videtur esse poenitendum.

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod sicut in ordine praedicamenti quaedam sunt in genere per se, quaedam sunt in genere per reductionem, sicut principia et etiam privationes⁵; sic intelligendum est in articulis fidei. Quaedam enim sunt antecedentia, quaedam consequentia, et quaedam sunt directe credibilia, sicut articuli; et in omnibus his iudicatur quis haereticus, si perverse sentiat. Per hunc modum intelligendum est in praeceptis decalogi, quod quaedam sunt ibi prohibita principaliter et explicite, quaedam ut annexa et implicite: ut verbi gratia, si dicatur: Non moechaberis⁶, principaliter prohibetur et explicite actus adulterii, sed implicite et in generali omnis actus coitus ut antecedens; et sic prohibetur concupiscentia coitus sive aspectus mulieris ad moechandum; consequenter vero prohibetur omnis effusio seminis inordinata. Sic intelligendum in aliis, quod in primo praecepto praecipitur cultus Dei; et in hoc praecipitur actus fidei antecedenter, et consequenter omnis elatio et superbia prohibetur; et sic in aliis⁷.

Dub. III

Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit: Cum dicimus: Dimitte nobis debita nostra etc.; manifestamus, nos habere quod nobis dimittatur. Esto ergo, quod aliquis non habeat conscientiam peccati in aliquo instanti, utpote quando Missam cantat, et est bene confessus et intentus caelestibus; tunc videtur, quod talis dicendo istam orationem peccet mortaliter, quia facit contra conscientiam.

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod omnis homo potest rationabiliter habere conscientiam de peccato veniali, tum propter frequentiam, tum propter ignorantiam, quia in multis ignoranter delinquimus, etiam cum credimus bene facere; tum propter adhaerentiam, quia amor rei temporalis et affectiones istae inordinatae frequenter multum nobis adhaerent. Et ideo quilibet potest dicere: Ab occultis meis munda me, Domine⁸ etc. — Vel potest dici, quod adhuc potest dicere in persona aliorum; et ideo non peccat, sed pro aliis impetrat pro illo tempore⁹, vel petit pro se ipso pro statu alio.

Dub. IV

Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit: Delet omnino haec oratio minima et quotidiana etc. Videtur enim ex hoc dicere Augustinus¹⁰, quod oratio dominicalis deleat peccata. Sed contra: solius gratiae est delere peccata: ergo etc. — Si tu dicas, quantum ad poenam; contra: non est par poena venialis et mortalis; sed ista est satisfactio pro venialibus: non ergo pro mortalibus.

p. 413

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod ipse loquitur de deletione quantum ad poenam. Valet enim haec oratio contra poenam venialis et mortalis; sed plus contra poenam debitam alicui veniali, quae tota potest remitti in hac oratione, si dicatur devote. Ad¹¹ poenam mortalis valet, sed non tantum, quia non totum remittit; valet tamen aliquantulum, immo multum, non tantum ratione orationis, sed ratione eleemosynae implicitae; et ista est eleemosyna praecipua, scilicet remittere peccatum proximo; et ideo dicit¹²: «Si veraciter dicitur: Dimitte nobis, sicut et nos dimittimus».

Dub. V

Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit: Si ita veraciter dicatur, sicut et nos dimittimus etc. Secundum hoc enim videtur, quod omnis qui habet rancorem, in dicendo istam orationem peccet mortaliter; quia omnis qui petit, sibi dimitti, sicut dimittit alii, si non dimittit, ex hoc petit, sibi non dimitti; sed quicumque petit, sibi peccatum non dimitti, peccat mortaliter: ergo videtur, quod semper peccat mortaliter, quando hanc orationem dicit.

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod nullus dicens hanc orationem intendit ipsam dicere ad petendum iram, sed potius ad petendum misericordiam. Quando ergo dicit illam conditionem, non intendit vim conditionis aggravare, sive sit homo intelligens, sive simplex; et ideo non est ibi novus contemptus, ac per hoc nec novum peccatum; nihilominus peccatum aggravatur occasionaliter¹³. Et si tu obiicias, quod tunc deberet abstinere; dico, quod adhuc aggravaretur magis, dum ab aliis petitionibus saluberrimis cor petentis arceretur. Si tu dicas, quod illam deberet dimittere; adhuc gravius peccaret, dum Domini orationem scienter infringeret. Et ideo sanum consilium est cuilibet, quod in fraterno odio nullatenus perseveret; apparet enim, quod sine dispendio maximo esse non potest¹⁴.

English Translation

DOUBTS CONCERNING THE TEXT OF THE MASTER.

Doubt I

In this section there are doubts concerning the text, and first it is asked about that division which the Master sets down in the text, that penance is conducted in three ways, whether it is the penance-virtue, or the penance-Sacrament. And it seems that it is not a virtue, because this is simple and a most specific species¹. — Likewise, that it is not a Sacrament either: because, when the superior is multiplied, the inferior is multiplied²: therefore according to this it seems that penance, according to the three differences, is a threefold Sacrament. Moreover, «every Sacrament, as Ambrose says, is simple».

I respond: It must be said that the penance which is before baptism is the penance-virtue, not the penance-Sacrament; and the penance which is after baptism is the penance-Sacrament; and therefore penance in this division is taken commonly for the virtue and the Sacrament; nor is it said equivocally, but analogically by reduction to one nature³. — Further it must be noted that these parts do not diversify penance essentially, but according to state; and therefore it is not a division into essential parts, nor is it necessary on this account that the Sacrament be multiplied or composite. And so that is clear⁴.

Doubt II

Likewise it is asked about this, that he says that penance is made for the sins which the decalogue of the Law contains. For it seems not to be said well, because in the decalogue pride is not forbidden, nor hypocrisy, nor the like: therefore for these there seems to be no penance to be done.

I respond: It must be said that, just as in the order of a predicament some things are in a genus per se, some are in a genus by reduction, as principles and also privations⁵; so it must be understood in the articles of faith. For some are antecedent, some consequent, and some are directly to be believed, as the articles; and in all these one is judged a heretic, if he hold perversely. In this manner it must be understood in the precepts of the decalogue, that some things are there forbidden principally and explicitly, some as annexed and implicitly: as, for example, if it be said: Thou shalt not commit adultery⁶, the act of adultery is principally and explicitly forbidden, but implicitly and in general every act of coition as antecedent; and so the concupiscence of coition or the gazing upon a woman to commit adultery is forbidden; consequently indeed every inordinate effusion of seed is forbidden. So it must be understood in the others, that in the first precept the worship of God is commanded; and in this the act of faith is commanded antecedently, and consequently all haughtiness and pride is forbidden; and so in the others⁷.

Doubt III

Likewise it is asked about this, that he says: When we say: Forgive us our debts etc.; we manifest that we have something to be forgiven us. Suppose then that someone does not have consciousness of sin in some instant, as when he sings Mass, and is well confessed and intent upon heavenly things; then it seems that such a one, in saying that prayer, sins mortally, because he acts against conscience.

I respond: It must be said that every man can reasonably have consciousness of venial sin, both on account of frequency, and on account of ignorance, because in many things we offend ignorantly, even when we believe ourselves to do well; and on account of adherence, because the love of a temporal thing and those inordinate affections frequently cling much to us. And therefore anyone can say: From my hidden sins cleanse me, O Lord⁸ etc. — Or it can be said that one can still say it in the person of others; and therefore he does not sin, but obtains for others for that time⁹, or asks for himself with respect to another state.

Doubt IV

Likewise it is asked about this, that he says: This least and daily prayer wholly blots out etc. For it seems from this that Augustine says¹⁰ that the Lord's Prayer blots out sins. But on the contrary: it belongs to grace alone to blot out sins: therefore etc. — If you say, as to the penalty; on the contrary: the penalty of a venial and of a mortal sin is not equal; but this is satisfaction for venial sins: therefore not for mortal sins.

I respond: It must be said that he is speaking of a blotting-out as to penalty. For this prayer avails against the penalty of venial and of mortal sin; but more against the penalty due to some venial sin, which can be wholly remitted in this prayer, if it be said devoutly. As to¹¹ the penalty of mortal sin it avails, but not so much, because it does not remit the whole; yet it avails somewhat, indeed much, not only by reason of the prayer, but by reason of the implied almsgiving; and this is the chief almsgiving, namely to forgive a sin to one's neighbor; and therefore he says¹²: «If it be truly said: Forgive us, as we also forgive».

Doubt V

Likewise it is asked about this, that he says: If it be truly said thus, as we also forgive etc. For according to this it seems that everyone who has rancor, in saying that prayer, sins mortally; because everyone who asks that it be forgiven him, as he forgives another, if he does not forgive, by this asks that it be not forgiven him; but whoever asks that his sin be not forgiven him sins mortally: therefore it seems that he always sins mortally, when he says this prayer.

I respond: It must be said that no one saying this prayer intends to say it for the asking of wrath, but rather for the asking of mercy. When therefore he says that condition, he does not intend to aggravate the force of the condition, whether he be an understanding man or a simple one; and therefore there is no new contempt there, and through this no new sin; nevertheless the sin is aggravated occasionally¹³. And if you object that then he ought to abstain; I say that it would be aggravated still more, while the heart of the one asking would be cut off from the other most salutary petitions. If you say that he ought to omit that [condition]; he would sin still more grievously, while he would knowingly break the Lord's prayer. And therefore it is sound counsel for everyone that he in no way persevere in fraternal hatred; for it appears that it cannot be without the greatest loss¹⁴.

Apparatus Criticus

1
Porphyr., de Praedicab. c. de Specie: «Amplius autem [species definitur] sic quoque: Species est, quae de pluribus et differentibus numero in eo quod quid est [essentialiter] praedicatur; sed haec quidem assignatio specialissimae [speciei] est, et quae solum species est, non autem genus [v. g. homo]». Colligitur ex dicto Aristot. supra pag. 110, nota 5, allegato. — Superius post Sacramenti cod. H addit videtur.
Porphyry, On the Predicables, the chapter On Species: «Moreover [species is defined] also thus: Species is that which is predicated of many things differing in number in respect of what a thing is [essentially]; but this assignation is of the most specific [species], and of that which is species only, not genus [e.g. man]». Gathered from the saying of Aristotle cited above, p. 110, note 5. — Above, after Sacramenti ("of a Sacrament") codex H adds videtur ("it seems").
2
Vide supra pag. 75, nota 6.
See above, p. 75, note 6.
3
Vide supra d. 14. p. I. a. 1. q. 4. in fine corp.
See above, d. 14, p. I, a. 1, q. 4, at the end of the body.
4
Idem dub. solvit Alex. Hal., S. p. IV. q. 16. m. 3. a. 1. ad 4. et q. 15. in principio; B. Albert., hic a. 47; S. Thom., hic q. 1. a. 2.
The same doubt is resolved by Alexander of Hales, Summa p. IV, q. 16, m. 3, a. 1, ad 4, and q. 15 at the beginning; Blessed Albert, here a. 47; St. Thomas, here q. 1, a. 2.
5
Cfr. II. Sent. d. 21. p. I. a. 2. q. 1. in fine et ibid. pag. 48, nota 1. — De seq. propos. vide III. Sent. d. 25. a. 1. q. 1. in corp.
Cf. II Sent., d. 21, p. I, a. 2, q. 1, at the end, and ibid., p. 48, note 1. — On the following proposition see III Sent., d. 25, a. 1, q. 1, in the body.
6
Exod. 20, 14. Cfr. III. Sent. d. 37. dub. 6. — Inferius pro omnis actus codd. R T omnis illicitus, et pro moechandum codd. H L V (bb a secunda manu) videndum, edd. concupiscendum.
Exod. 20:14. Cf. III Sent., d. 37, doubt 6. — Below, for omnis actus ("every act") codices R, T read omnis illicitus ("every unlawful [act]"), and for moechandum ("to commit adultery") codices H, L, V (bb by a second hand) videndum ("to look upon"), the editions concupiscendum ("to covet").
7
Cfr. III. Sent. d. 37. a. 2. q. 1. ad 7. — Cod. P addit: «Non adorabis etc., hoc est, me solum adorabis ut Dominum, id est, in me solum credes tanquam in summam veritatem, in me solum sperabis tanquam in summe liberalem, me solum prae omnibus diliges tanquam summe bonum. Luxuria prohibetur, cum dicitur: Non concupisces uxorem etc. [Cfr. III. Sent. d. 40. dub. I.]. Avaritia, cum praecipitur: Non concupisces rem etc. Ira, cum dicit: Non occides. Item superbia contraria adorationi prohibetur in primo mandato, quia initium superbiae apostatare a Deo, Eccli. 10 [v. 14], item: Initium omnis peccati superbia, Eccli. 10 [v. 15], et secundum hoc prohibetur in omni mandato. Invidia, quae recte opponitur dilectioni proximi, prohibetur ibi: Honora patrem tuum etc.; quia nomine patris et matris intelligitur omnis proximus diligendus in suo ordine. Accidia vero prohibetur, cum dicitur: Memento, ut diem Sabbati etc.; nam qui taedium boni habet, quietis Sabbatum sanctificare non potest. Gula prohibetur in eodem, quia qui gulae deservit, suavitatem devotionis non servat. Hypocrisis prohibetur in Non assumes nomen Dei tui etc.; ille enim nomen Dei in vanum assumit, qui bonitatis nomen et sanctitatis sophistice quaerit etc.» — Idem dub. solvit B. Albert., hic a. 53; S. Thom., hic circa lit.
Cf. III Sent., d. 37, a. 2, q. 1, ad 7. — Codex P adds: «Thou shalt not adore etc., that is, me alone shalt thou adore as Lord, that is, in me alone shalt thou believe as in the highest truth, in me alone shalt thou hope as in the most bountiful, me alone above all shalt thou love as the highest good. Lust is forbidden when it is said: Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife etc. [Cf. III Sent., d. 40, doubt 1]. Avarice, when it is commanded: Thou shalt not covet his goods etc. Wrath, when he says: Thou shalt not kill. Likewise pride, contrary to adoration, is forbidden in the first commandment, because the beginning of pride is to fall away from God, Ecclus. 10 [v. 14], likewise: Pride is the beginning of all sin, Ecclus. 10 [v. 15], and according to this it is forbidden in every commandment. Envy, which is rightly opposed to the love of neighbor, is forbidden there: Honor thy father etc.; because by the name of father and mother is understood every neighbor to be loved in his order. Sloth indeed is forbidden when it is said: Remember to keep holy the Sabbath day etc.; for he who has weariness of good cannot sanctify the Sabbath of rest. Gluttony is forbidden in the same, because he who serves gluttony does not keep the sweetness of devotion. Hypocrisy is forbidden in Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God etc.; for he takes the name of God in vain who sophistically seeks the name of goodness and holiness etc.» — The same doubt is resolved by Blessed Albert, here a. 53; St. Thomas, here on the text.
8
Psalm. 18, 13: Delicta quis intelligit [propter frequentiam sive multitudinem]? ab occultis meis munda me [propter ignorantiam], et ab alienis [i. e. alienantibus nos a fervore caritatis] parce servo tuo [propter adhaerentiam]. Ita B. Albert., hic a. 55.
Ps. 18:13: Who can understand sins? [on account of frequency or multitude] From my hidden sins cleanse me [on account of ignorance], and from those of others spare thy servant [i.e. things estranging us from the fervor of charity] [on account of adherence]. So Blessed Albert, here a. 55.
9
Dicit enim debita nostra, non debita mea. — Idem dub. solvit praeter B. Albert. S. Thom., hic circa lit.
For he says our debts, not my debts. — The same doubt is resolved, besides Blessed Albert, by St. Thomas, here on the text.
10
Augustinus, Enchirid. c. 71. seq. Cfr. hic lit. Magistri, c. 6.
Augustine, Enchiridion, c. 71 ff. Cf. here the Master's text, c. 6. [?]
11
Edd. Contra, quae [lectio] etiam inferius cum non paucis codd. remittitur pro remittit.
The editions read Contra ("On the contrary"), which [reading] also below, with not a few codices, has remittitur ("is remitted") for remittit ("remits"). [?]
12
August., hic in lit. Magistri, c. 6. Ibid. etiam insinuantur alia, quae in hac solutione ponuntur.
Augustine, here in the Master's text, c. 6. There also are intimated the other things which are set down in this solution. [?]
13
Cfr. III. Sent. d. 37. a. 2. q. 1. ad 7., de modo aggravationis occasionalis.
Cf. III Sent., d. 37, a. 2, q. 1, ad 7, on the mode of occasional aggravation. [?]
14
Vide Alex. Hal., S. p. IV. q. 10. tr. de Officio Missae, p. II. de quinta petitione orationis dominicae. — Idem dub. solvit B. Albert., hic; S. Thom., hic circa lit.
See Alexander of Hales, Summa p. IV, q. 10, treatise on the Office of the Mass, p. II, on the fifth petition of the Lord's Prayer. — The same doubt is resolved by Blessed Albert, here; St. Thomas, here on the text. [?]