Dist. 21, Part 1, Art. 2, Q. 1
Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 21
Articulus II. De purgatione, quae fit per purgatorium.
Quaestio I. Utrum in purgatorio post hanc vitam fiat purgatio aliqua ab aliqua culpa, an solum a poena.
Consequenter quantum ad secundum articulum quaeritur de purgatione, quae fit per purgatorium. De qua duo quaeruntur. Primo quaeritur, utrum in purgatorio post hanc vitam fiat aliqua purgatio ab aliqua culpa, an solum a poena. Secundo, utrum purgatio illa fiat per ignem materialem.
Quantum ergo ad primum ostenditur, quod fiat ibi purgatio a culpa:
1. Primo per illud quod dicitur Matthaei duodecimo1: Qui dixerit contra Spiritum sanctum verbum, non remittetur ei neque in hoc saeculo neque in futuro: ergo implicat Dominus, aliqua peccata remitti in futuro; sed non nisi in purgatorio: ergo etc.
2. Item, Gregorius quarto Dialogorum2 dicit, quod «quaedam leves culpae remittuntur in futuro», et ibi multa dicit, quae ad hoc ostendendum faciunt. Si dicas, quod hoc intelligit quantum ad reatum poenae; hoc non solvit, quia in futuro, utpote in purgatorio, non solum fit purgatio a reatu culparum venialium, verum etiam mortalium in his qui poenitentiam in hac vita non complent.
3. Item, omnis purgatio, secundum quod huiusmodi, respicit foeditatem aliquam; foeditas autem animae culpa est3: ergo videtur, quod purgatorius ignis sit contra culpam. Si dicas, quod est contra pronitatem vel sequelam vel aliquid tale; tunc quaero: cum liberum arbitrium post hanc vitam sit ita immobile respectu pronitatis, sicut respectu voluntatis; quare talis sequela potest purgari, et non venialis culpa, cum plus laedat animam sequela mortalis quam culpa venialis?
4. Item, quod purgat aliquid aliquo modo4 habet oppositionem ad illud; sed poena poenae non opponitur: ergo si est ibi purgatio, non est a poena: ergo a culpa aliqua.
Contra: 1. Super illud primae Ioannis quinto5: Est peccatum ad mortem; Glossa: «Quod in hac vita non corrigitur, frustra post mortem venia eius postulatur»: ergo nulla post mortem ibi culpa purgatur.
2. Item, Damascenus6: «Quod est hominibus mors, hoc est angelis casus», et e converso; sed angeli post casum a nulla culpa possunt liberari: ergo nec homines post mortem.
3. Item, Gregorius in Dialogis7: «Talis in iudicio quisque futurus est, qualis de corpore exivit»: si ergo exivit cum veniali: patet etc.
4. Item, liberum arbitrium medium est inter profectum in bono et liberationem a malo culpae; sed post mortem non potest in bono proficere: ergo nec a culpa aliqua resurgere.
5. Item, facilius est labi in veniale quam liberari a veniali; sed post mortem non potest anima venialiter peccare: ergo nec a veniali resurgere.
6. Item, veniale in nobis non est nisi ratione fomitis8: ergo ablato fomite, veniale non manet; sed fomes aufertur in morte, non post mortem: ergo et veniale.
Conclusio. Post hanc vitam poena purgatorii potest purgare non solum a poena, sed etiam a culpa peccati venialis.
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod aliquorum magistrorum et bene intelligentium opinio fuit, quod nullum peccatum post mortem dimittitur, pro eo quod liberi arbitrii quantum ad meritum vel demeritum omnino cessat usus. Unde dicunt, quod venialia omnino9 remittuntur aut per poenitentiam, aut per finalem gratiam, si non adsit locus poenitentiae, si forte morte praeoccupatus moritur iustus homo.
Rationem autem huius positionis et intelligentiam per hunc modum assignant. Dicunt enim, quod triplex est gratia, scilicet baptismalis, poenitentialis et finalis; et quaelibet harum gratiarum pro sui initio dominium habet in ipsa anima. Pro eo quod dominatur in ipso ingressu, ut gratia baptismalis, vel status sui principio, ut finalis10, delet omnem culpam, non tantum mortalem, verum etiam venialem. Dominatur autem gratia baptismalis
ex virtute Sacramenti, gratia poenitentialis ex subiectione et conformitate liberi arbitrii, gratia finalis ex perfecta conformitate omnium virium animae ad ipsam gratiam. Cum enim ipsa1b separatur a carne, iam pronitates et perturbationes, quae inerant animae ex carne, recedunt, et potentiae animae tranquillantur et gratiae subiiciuntur; ac per hoc venialia delentur, sive sint in parte animae rationali, sive in parte animae sensibili. Et ita nullum veniale dimittitur post hanc vitam, sed in illo puncto, in quo potest dici: haec est finalis gratia, quae dominium sibi vindicat et omnem expellit culpam. — Si ergo obiiciatur eis, quod in futuro purgantur et remittuntur peccata; respondetur secundum eos, quod remittuntur quantum ad reatum sive poenam, et purgantur quantum ad scoriam sive sequelam. Et illud videtur magister Hugo2b sensisse, qui ait sic, loquens de remissione peccati: «Aliquando Deus remittit secundum pietatem, aliquando secundum severitatem, aliquando secundum utrumque. Per incendium purgatorii scoria peccati excoquitur, per lavacrum baptismi peccati macula abluitur, per flagellum satisfactionis peccati palea excutitur». — Sed licet ista opinio sit multum rationi consona, tamen auctoritates Sanctorum videntur expresse contraire. Nam ipse Gregorius dicit in Moralibus3b, quod «aliqua peccata dimittuntur post hanc vitam». Et si tu dicas, quod intelligit quantum ad reatum, sicut obiectum fuit; sic de omnibus posset intelligi culpis. — Item, Isidorus tractans illud Matthaei tertio4b: Ipse vos baptizabit in Spiritu sancto et igni: «Peccata, quae praecesserunt, Spiritus sanctus per aquae baptismum abluet, et quaedam ex eis quae postea sequuntur criminibus per ignem purgatorium remittet». Cum ergo peccata praecedentia non solum quantum ad poenam, sed etiam quantum ad culpam abluantur: ergo in purgatorio quaedam quantum ad culpam sunt remittenda. Rursus, cum gratia dominium habeat in anima statim in ipsa separatione, propter quid non purgat a peccati scoria vel sequela, sicut a veniali culpa?
Et propter hoc est hic secundus modus dicendi, quem approbat Magister in littera5b, et Sanctorum multiplex confirmat auctoritas. Dicendum ergo, quod aliqua peccata, utpote venialia, non solum in hoc saeculo, sed etiam in purgatorio remitti possunt et remittuntur, quando quis pertransit cum venialibus, pro eo quod gratia non fuit adiuta finaliter ad illa delenda, et ideo indiget auxilio. — Quoniam ergo voluntas potest gratiae post hanc vitam esse conformis, quamvis non possit esse adiutrix, pro eo quod cessavit tempus meriti; ideo indiget adiutorio exteriori. Et cum non sit locus Sacramenti, habet adiutorium ignis punitivi sive purgatorii; qui ideo dicitur purgatorius, quoniam anima6b purgatur a peccati scoria et a veniali culpa, si cum illa transeat. Et hoc possibile est, quia, sicut ostensum est in praecedenti problemate, ad deletionem venialis sufficit, quod liberum arbitrium se conformet gratiae, nec est necesse, quod adiuvet. — Concedendum ergo, aliquos post hanc vitam a veniali culpa posse purgari.
1. Ad illud ergo quod obiicitur, quod frustra post mortem venia postulatur de eo quod non corrigitur; dicendum, quod illud intelligitur de mortali. — Vel fiat vis in hoc quod dicit, quod in hac vita non corrigitur: verum est vel in se, vel in merito. Quamvis autem non corrigatur aliquod veniale, cum quo quis transit — non corrigatur, inquam, in se — meruit tamen corrigi, quia qui decedit in caritate per illam meruit etiam post hunc statum ab his emundari, quae retardant praemium caritatis.
2. Ad illud quod obiicitur de casu angelorum et morte hominum, dicendum, quod simile est quantum ad liberi arbitrii invertibilitatem sive quantum ad peccatum mortale, non quantum ad omnia; nam mali angeli possunt in poenis proficere, quamvis non possunt a malo resurgere7b. Per oppositum, ratione boni meriti praeteriti boni homines possunt a malo eripi, quamvis non possunt in malum labi, quia in bono, in quo moriuntur, sunt confirmati.
3. Ad illud quod obiicitur de Gregorio, dicendum, quod sicut ipsemet subiungit8b, illud intelligitur quantum ad mortalia, non quantum ad venialia, quia ipsemet excipit illa.
4. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod liberum arbitrium tenet medium; dicendum, quod falsum est pro statu illo. Est enim in statu, in quo potest ad ingressum in gloriam disponi per impedimenti remotionem, quamvis non possit mereri; quoniam ad
deletionem venialis et ad remissionem reatus peccati sufficit praesentia gratiae et poenae cum consonantia liberi arbitrii et adiutorio meriti praeteriti.
5. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod facilius est labi in malum; dicendum, quod verum est quantum ad liberum arbitrium vertibile, non quantum ad omnem statum animae.
6. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod ablato fomite, aufertur veniale; dicendum, quod verum est quantum ad potestatem peccandi de futuro; non tamen oportet auferri veniale prius perpetratum, quia non omnis causa introducendi est causa conservandi, sicut in multis exemplis patet. Destructo enim cultello, non potest infligi plaga; si tamen cultellus destruatur, non oportet, propter hoc sanari plagam prius inflictam.
I. Opinio I. hic relata fuit plurium antiquorum magistrorum, quam duobus modis explicat et probabiliorem esse censet Alex. Hal., S. p. IV. q. 15. m. 3. a. 3. § 5; sed plurimi posteriores Scholastici cum Ss. Thoma et Bonav. eandem reprobant. Scot. autem (hic q. I. n. 8. seqq.) manet dubius, utrum morienti cum solis venialibus culpa remittatur in ultimo instanti huius vitae, an initio alterius.
De eadem quaestione: S. Thom., hic q. I. a. 3. quaestiunc. I; de Malo q. 7. a. II. — B. Albert., hic a. I. — Petr. a Tar., hic q. 2. a. 2. quaestiunc. I. — Richard. a Med., hic a. 2. q. 2. — Durand., hic q. I.
II. Purgationem animarum post hanc vitam fieri per ignem, quin tamen excludantur aliae poenae, negant Graeci, affirmant nunc communiter Latini, quorum sententia gravissimis auctoritatibus confirmatur, nondum autem ab Ecclesia definita est; nec constat, quod omnes purgandi illam poenam sensus patiantur. — De modo talis purgationis redit sermo infra d. 44. p. II. a. 2. 3.
De eadem (2.) quaestione: Alex. Hal., loc. cit. m. 4. a. 4. § I. 2. — S. Thom., hic q. I. a. I. quaestiunc. 3. — B. Albert., supra d. 20. a. 3. — Petr. a Tar., hic q. I. a. 2. quaestiunc. I. — Richard. a Med. rem tangit supra d. 20. a. 2. q. I.
---
Article II. On the purgation which is made through purgatory.
Question I. Whether in purgatory after this life there is any purgation from any fault, or only from pain.
Consequently, as regards the second article, it is asked concerning the purgation which is made through purgatory. Concerning which two [things] are asked. First it is asked whether in purgatory after this life there is any purgation from any fault, or only from pain. Second, whether that purgation is made through material fire.
As regards the first, then, it is shown that there is made there a purgation from fault:
1. First, by that which is said in Matthew, chapter twelve1: He who shall speak a word against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world nor in the world to come: therefore the Lord implies that some sins are remitted in the world to come; but not except in purgatory: therefore etc.
2. Likewise, Gregory in the fourth [book] of the Dialogues2 says that «certain light faults are remitted in the world to come», and there he says many things which serve to show this. If you say that he understands this as regards the liability of penalty; this does not resolve [it], because in the world to come, namely in purgatory, there is made a purgation not only from the liability of venial faults, but also of mortal [faults] in those who do not complete penance in this life.
3. Likewise, every purgation, as such, regards some foulness; but the foulness of the soul is fault3: therefore it seems that the purgatorial fire is against fault. If you say that it is against the proneness or the consequence [of sin] or something of the sort; then I ask: since free choice after this life is as immovable with respect to proneness as with respect to the will; why can such a consequence be purged, and not venial fault, since the consequence of a mortal [sin] harms the soul more than a venial fault?
4. Likewise, that which purges something in some way4 has an opposition to it; but pain is not opposed to pain: therefore if there is a purgation there, it is not from pain: therefore from some fault.
On the contrary: 1. Upon that [passage] of the First [Letter] of John, chapter five5: There is a sin unto death; the Gloss: «That which is not corrected in this life, in vain is pardon for it sought after death»: therefore no fault is purged there after death.
2. Likewise, the Damascene6: «What death is to men, that the fall is to angels», and conversely; but angels after the fall can be freed from no fault: therefore neither can men after death.
3. Likewise, Gregory in the Dialogues7: «Each one will be in the judgment such as he went out from the body»: if, therefore, he went out with a venial [sin]: it is clear etc.
4. Likewise, free choice is a mean between advancement in good and liberation from the evil of fault; but after death it cannot advance in good: therefore neither can it rise again from any fault.
5. Likewise, it is easier to lapse into a venial [sin] than to be freed from a venial [sin]; but after death the soul cannot sin venially: therefore neither can it rise again from a venial [sin].
6. Likewise, the venial [sin] in us exists only by reason of the tinder [of sin]8: therefore, the tinder being removed, the venial [sin] does not remain; but the tinder is taken away in death, not after death: therefore the venial [sin] too [is taken away in death].
Conclusion. After this life the pain of purgatory can purge not only from pain, but also from the fault of venial sin.
I respond: It must be said that the opinion of some masters, men of good understanding, was that no sin is remitted after death, on the ground that the use of free choice, as regards merit or demerit, wholly ceases. Hence they say that venial [sins] are entirely9 remitted either through penance, or through final grace, if there be no place for penance, if perchance a just man dies forestalled by death.
But they assign the reason of this position and the understanding [of it] in this way. For they say that grace is threefold, namely baptismal, penitential, and final; and each of these graces, by its beginning, has dominion in the soul itself. On the ground that the grace which has dominion at the very entrance, like baptismal grace, or at the beginning of its state, like final [grace]10, blots out every fault, not only mortal, but even venial. But baptismal grace has dominion
by the power of the Sacrament, penitential grace by the subjection and conformity of free choice, final grace by the perfect conformity of all the powers of the soul to that grace. For when the soul itself1b is separated from the flesh, now the pronenesses and disturbances which were in the soul from the flesh recede, and the powers of the soul are tranquilized and made subject to grace; and through this the venial [sins] are blotted out, whether they be in the rational part of the soul or in the sensible part of the soul. And so no venial [sin] is remitted after this life, but at that point at which it can be said: this is final grace, which claims dominion for itself and expels every fault. — If, then, it be objected against them that in the world to come sins are purged and remitted; it is answered, according to them, that they are remitted as regards the liability or penalty, and purged as regards the dross or consequence. And master Hugh2b seems to have held this, who speaks thus, speaking of the remission of sin: «Sometimes God remits according to mercy, sometimes according to severity, sometimes according to both. Through the fire of purgatory the dross of sin is decocted, through the laver of baptism the stain of sin is washed away, through the scourge of satisfaction the chaff of sin is shaken out». — But although this opinion is much in accord with reason, nevertheless the authorities of the Saints seem expressly to be contrary. For Gregory himself says in the Morals3b that «some sins are remitted after this life». And if you say that he understands [this] as regards the liability, as was objected; thus it could be understood of all faults. — Likewise, Isidore, treating that [passage] of Matthew, chapter three4b: He will baptize you in the Holy Spirit and fire: «The sins which preceded the Holy Spirit will wash away through the baptism of water, and some of those which afterward follow upon crimes he will remit through purgatorial fire». Since, therefore, the preceding sins are washed away not only as regards the penalty, but also as regards the fault: therefore in purgatory certain [sins] are to be remitted as regards the fault. Again, since grace has dominion in the soul at once at the very separation, why does it not purge from the dross or consequence of sin, just as from venial fault?
And on account of this there is here a second mode of speaking, which the Master approves in the [Sentences] text5b, and which the manifold authority of the Saints confirms. It must be said, therefore, that some sins, namely venial [ones], can be and are remitted not only in this world, but also in purgatory, when someone passes over with venial [sins], on the ground that grace was not finally assisted to blot them out, and therefore needs help. — Since, then, the will can be conformed to grace after this life, although it cannot be its helper, on the ground that the time of merit has ceased; therefore it needs an external help. And since there is no place for the Sacrament, it has the help of punitive or purgatorial fire; which is therefore called purgatorial, because the soul6b is purged from the dross of sin and from venial fault, if it pass over with that. And this is possible, because, as was shown in the preceding problem, for the blotting out of a venial [sin] it suffices that free choice conform itself to grace, nor is it necessary that it assist. — It must be granted, therefore, that some after this life can be purged from venial fault.
1. To that, then, which is objected, that after death pardon is sought in vain for that which is not corrected; it must be said that that is understood of mortal [sin]. — Or let emphasis be placed on this, that he says that in this life it is not corrected: it is true either in itself or in merit. But although some venial [sin] be not corrected, with which one passes over — not corrected, I say, in itself — yet he merited to be corrected, because he who departs in charity merited through it to be cleansed even after this state from those things which retard the reward of charity.
2. To that which is objected concerning the fall of the angels and the death of men, it must be said that it is similar as regards the invertibility of free choice, or as regards mortal sin, not as regards all things; for the evil angels can advance in penalties, although they cannot rise again from evil7b. Conversely, by reason of past good merit good men can be snatched from evil, although they cannot lapse into evil, because they are confirmed in the good in which they die.
3. To that which is objected concerning Gregory, it must be said that, as he himself adds8b, that is understood as regards mortal [sins], not as regards venial [sins], because he himself excepts those.
4. To that which is objected, that free choice holds a mean; it must be said that it is false for that state. For it is in a state in which it can be disposed for entrance into glory through the removal of an impediment, although it cannot merit; because for
the blotting out of a venial [sin] and for the remission of the liability of sin there suffices the presence of grace and of pain, with the consonance of free choice and the help of past merit.
5. To that which is objected, that it is easier to lapse into evil; it must be said that it is true as regards mutable free choice, not as regards the whole state of the soul.
6. To that which is objected, that, the tinder being removed, the venial [sin] is taken away; it must be said that it is true as regards the power of sinning in the future; nevertheless it is not necessary that a venial [sin] previously committed be taken away, because not every cause of introducing [something] is a cause of conserving [it], as is clear in many examples. For, the knife being destroyed, a wound cannot be inflicted; yet if the knife be destroyed, it is not necessary, on this account, that a wound previously inflicted be healed.
I. Opinion I, related here, was that of many of the ancient masters, which Alexander of Hales explains in two modes and judges to be the more probable, S. p. IV. q. 15. m. 3. a. 3. § 5; but most of the later Scholastics, with Sts. Thomas and Bonaventure, reject it. Scotus, however (here q. I. n. 8. ff.), remains doubtful whether, for one dying with venial [sins] alone, the fault is remitted in the last instant of this life, or at the beginning of the other.
On the same question: St. Thomas, here q. I. a. 3. quaestiuncula I; On Evil q. 7. a. II. — Bl. Albert, here a. I. — Peter of Tarentaise, here q. 2. a. 2. quaestiuncula I. — Richard of Mediavilla, here a. 2. q. 2. — Durandus, here q. I.
II. That the purgation of souls after this life is made through fire, yet without the other penalties being excluded, the Greeks deny, [but] the Latins now commonly affirm, whose opinion is confirmed by the weightiest authorities, yet has not been defined by the Church; nor is it established that all who are to be purged suffer that penalty of sense. — On the manner of such purgation the discourse returns below, d. 44. p. II. a. 2. 3.
On the same (2nd) question: Alexander of Hales, in the place cited, m. 4. a. 4. § I. 2. — St. Thomas, here q. I. a. I. quaestiuncula 3. — Bl. Albert, above d. 20. a. 3. — Peter of Tarentaise, here q. I. a. 2. quaestiuncula I. — Richard of Mediavilla touches the matter above, d. 20. a. 2. q. I.
---
- 1Vers. 32.Verse 32.
- 2Cap. 39. Cfr. Glossa ordinaria in Matth. 12, 32. apud Strabum et Lyranum nec non C. Qualis hinc (4.), d. 25. — Inferius verbis hoc intelligit plures codd. cum edd. perperam interserunt non. In fine arg. cod. aa addit: et ita nil esset illa differentia, quam assignat, quod parva delentur, magna autem non. Vide hic lit. Magistri, c. 6, ubi eadem instantia fertur et solvitur.Chapter 39. Cf. the ordinary Gloss on Matt. 12:32 in Strabus and Lyra, and also C. Qualis hinc (4.), d. 25. — Below, in the words he understands this several codices, with the editions, wrongly insert not. At the end of the argument codex aa adds: and so there would be no such difference as he assigns, that small [sins] are blotted out, but great ones are not. See here the Master's text, c. 6, where the same objection is raised and resolved.
- 3Cfr. supra d. 18. p. II. dub. 4.Cf. above d. 18. p. II. dub. 4.
- 4Plures codd. aliud.Several codices [read] aliud [another thing].
- 5Vers. 16. — Glossa, quae est interlinearis apud Lyranum, sumta est ex Gregor., XVI. Moral. c. 68. n. 82, et habetur etiam apud Bedam, in hunc locum.Verse 16. — The Gloss, which is interlinear in Lyra, is taken from Gregory, XVI Morals, c. 68. n. 82, and is also had in Bede, on this passage.
- 6Libr. II. de Fide orthod. c. 4: Oportet autem scire, quod hominibus est mors, hoc angelis esse lapsum. Post lapsum enim non est ipsis poenitentia, sicut nec hominibus post mortem. Cfr. II. Sent. d. 7. p. 1. a. I. q. 1.Book II, On the Orthodox Faith, c. 4: But it must be known that what death is to men, that the fall is to the angels. For after the fall there is no penance for them, just as neither for men after death. Cf. II Sent. d. 7. p. 1. a. I. q. 1.
- 7Libr. IV. c. 39: Qualis hinc quisque egreditur, talis in iudicio praesentatur.Book IV, c. 39: Such as each goes forth from here, such is he presented in the judgment.
- 8Sive concupiscentiae; cfr. tom. II. pag. 767, nota I.Or of concupiscence; cf. tom. II. p. 767, note I.
- 9Cod. aa omnia.Codex aa [reads] omnia [all things].
- 10Praebemus lectionem cod. V; alii codd., ut codd. L R S T X, cum hac lectione conveniunt, eo excepto, quod omittant exempla, scil. ut gratia baptismalis et ut finalis, codd. I K tantum ut gratia baptismalis, quod codd. F G perperam substituunt pro ut finalis; cod. M omittit solum ut finalis; edd., omisso ut finalis, pro vel substituunt quae in. Secundum Alex. Hal., S. p. IV. q. 15. m. 3. a. 3. § 5. gratia poenitentialis in...We provide the reading of codex V; the other codices, like codices L R S T X, agree with this reading, except that they omit the examples, namely like baptismal grace and like final [grace], codices I K only like baptismal grace, which codices F G wrongly substitute for like final [grace]; codex M omits only like final [grace]; the editions, omitting like final [grace], for or substitute which in. According to Alexander of Hales, S. p. IV. q. 15. m. 3. a. 3. § 5, penitential grace in...
- 1bCod. X supplet anima. Inferius post sive sint codd. R S T addunt ex parte vel.Codex X supplies the soul. Below, after whether they be codices R S T add on the part of, or.
- 2bPotius Richard. a S. Vict. (cfr. supra pag. 477, nota 2.) in lib. de Potestate ligandi et solvendi, c. 28; textus originalis post utrumque, sive ut ipse habet, secundum moderationem utriusque plura subiungit, et inferius pro abluitur substituit absque poena diluitur. Hug. a S. Vict., II. de Sacram. p. XVI. c. 4. simpliciter dicit, quod in purgatorio «qui ab hac vita cum quibusdam culpis, iusti tamen... exierunt, ad tempus cruciantur, ut purgentur».Rather Richard of St. Victor (cf. above p. 477, note 2.) in the book On the Power of Binding and Loosing, c. 28; the original text, after both, or as he himself has it, according to the moderation of both, adds many things, and below for is washed away substitutes is dissolved without penalty. Hugh of St. Victor, II On the Sacraments p. XVI. c. 4. says simply that in purgatory «those who departed from this life with certain faults, yet [being] just... are tormented for a time, that they may be purged».
- 3bLibr. IV. Dialog. (non Moral.) c. 39, iam supra fundam. 2, allegato. In eodem fundam. etiam seq. obiectio tacta fuit.Book IV of the Dialogues (not the Morals), c. 39, already cited above in fundamentum 2. In the same fundamentum the following objection too was touched upon.
- 4bVers. II. (Plurimi codd. Marc. I, 8.). — Isidor., de Ordine creatur. c. 14. n. 7: Hoc est, qui peccata vestra, quae praecesserunt, Spiritu sancto per aquae baptismum abluet vel solvet, et quaedam ex his quae postea sequentur criminibus etc.Verse II. (Most codices [read] Mark I, 8.). — Isidore, On the Order of Creatures, c. 14. n. 7: This is, he who will wash away or loose your sins, which preceded, by the Holy Spirit through the baptism of water, and some of those which afterward follow upon crimes etc.
- 5bHic c. 6. — Praeter auctoritates Gregorii et Isidori cfr. lib. de Vera et falsa Poenitentia (inter opera August.), c. 4. n. 9.Here c. 6. — Besides the authorities of Gregory and Isidore, cf. the book On True and False Penance (among the works of Augustine), c. 4. n. 9.
- 6bCod. X supplet ibi.Codex X supplies there.
- 7bCfr. II. Sent. d. 6. a. 2. q. I. seq. et d. 7. p. I. a. 1. q. I. seqq. Auctoritate codd. bis posuimus possunt pro possint.Cf. II Sent. d. 6. a. 2. q. I. f. and d. 7. p. I. a. 1. q. I. ff. On the authority of the codices we have twice put possunt [they can, indic.] for possint [subj.].
- 8bLoc. cit.: Sed tamen de quibusdam levibus culpis esse ante iudicium purgatorius ignis credendus est etc.In the place cited: But nevertheless concerning certain light faults a purgatorial fire is to be believed [to exist] before the judgment etc. ---