Dist. 21, Part 1, Dubia
Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 21
DUBIA CIRCA LITTERAM MAGISTRI.
Dub. I
In parte ista sunt dubitationes circa litteram, et primo de hoc quod dicit Magister: De illis etiam, qui aedificant ligna et stipulas1 etc. Videtur enim per hoc intelligere venialia. Sed contra: Isaiae quinto: Vae qui coniungitis domum ad domum etc. Glossa Hieronymi2: «Haeretici dogmata dogmatibus coniungunt; et qui supra fundamentum debuerunt aedificare aurum, argentum et lapides pretiosos, econtra aedificant lignum, foenum et stipulam»; sed constat, quod haeretici in fictione dogmatum suorum mortaliter peccant: ergo illud non intelligitur de venialibus.
Item, quaeritur, quo tropo dicantur venialia lignum et foenum et stipula; et cum multae sint venialium differentiae, quomodo ad tres possunt reduci?
Et respondendum est ad hoc, quod una scriptura multis modis potest exponi; unus tamen est principalis et litteralis intellectus, plures tamen esse possunt per adaptationem. Litteralis autem intellectus, secundum quod patet ex Glossa et littera sequenti, est de venialibus; Hieronymus vero per quandam adaptationem exponit.
Si quaeratur ratio huius intellectus; dicendum, quod Apostolus loquitur de venialibus, in quantum sunt cremabilia. Cremabile autem, quod praestat pabulum et consumitur ab igne, in triplici differentia est.
Quoddam enim est, quod durat diutius, quoddam, quod citissime consumitur, quoddam, quod medio modo. Primo modo dicitur lignum, secundo modo dicitur stipula, et tertio modo dicitur foenum, quod tenet medium inter utrumque extremum3.
Dub. II
Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit: Non frustra distinxit illa tria Apostolus: lignum et foenum et stipulam, quae illi aedificant. Videtur enim male dicere, quia supra fidem nihil aedificatur nisi bonum: ergo nullum peccatum; sed venialia sunt peccata: ergo nullo modo superaedificantur. — Item, nihil comburitur, quod est de spirituali aedificio; sed lignum et foenum et stipula superaedificantur: ergo non cremantur.
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod lignum et foenum et stipula superaedificari dicuntur dupliciter, secundum quod dupliciter possumus exponere. Potest enim per lignum intelligi opus bonum, cui tamen est annexum aliquod veniale peccatum, sicut patet in multis actibus; et tale opus ex alio habet, quod sit de aedificio, ex alio habet, quod sit cremabile. Nam superaedificatur ea ratione, qua bonum est propter principalem intentionem, sed crematur ea ratione, qua habet amorem terrenis annexum; et vix contingit nisi in perfectis, quin in bonis operibus cadat aliquid a latere reprehensibile. — Aliter potest exponi, ut per lignum, foenum et stipulam recte intelligantur venialia, et ita dicuntur superaedificari, non ut sint de aedificio, sed quoniam fundamentum aedificii non subvertunt, sed simul stant cum illo — non sic in mortalibus peccatis — et pro tanto dicuntur superaedificari4, tamen nihilominus cremabuntur.
Dub. III
Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit: Qui vero superaedificant aurum, argentum, lapides pretiosos de utroque igne securi sunt. Videtur enim male dicere, quia in auro intelligitur contemplatio Dei, in argento dilectio proximi, in lapidibus pretiosis bona opera5; sed omnes iusti haec superaedificant: ergo nullus iustus transibit per ignem purgatorium. — Si tu dicas, quod intelligitur cum praecisione; contra: Ecclesiastis septimo6: Non est qui faciat bonum et non peccet: ergo nullus praecise haec superaedificat.
Item quaeritur de sufficientia horum trium, et quomodo distinguuntur. Videtur enim, quod aurum potius deberet attribui dilectioni quam contemplationi, quia dilectio est pretiosissima.
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod superaedificatio contemplationis, dilectionis et bonae actionis intelligitur per aedificationem auri et argenti et lapidum cum praecisione, ita quod alia non superaedificentur7. Tunc autem dicuntur venialia superaedificari non quando committuntur, sed quando in usum et in habitum convertuntur, sicut in dilectione filiorum et uxoris et huiusmodi; et sine tali habitu et usu bene potest homo esse, quamvis non possit peccata aliqua quantum ad actum vitare, ut puta quae ex subreptione, vel ignorantia oriuntur. Solis ergo perfectis competit superaedificatio auri etc., et hi securi sunt.
Quod quaeritur de distinctione istorum, dicendum, quod est loqui de ordinatione mentis quantum ad partem superiorem, et sic intelligitur contemplatio Dei; et quoniam haec dicit eminens in anima, recte intelligitur per aurum8. Quantum vero ad partem inferiorem, dupliciter: aut prout dirigit voluntatem in se, et sic est dilectio proximi; aut prout contingit, voluntatem dirigi in opere, et sic est bona operatio. Et dilectio proximi comparatur ad bonam operationem sicut argentum ad lapides pretiosos, pro eo quod, sicut argentum substernitur lapidibus pretiosis et per illos ornatur, sic dilectio per bonos effectus. — Et nota, quod in contemplatione Dei clauditur dilectio. Et sic patet responsio ad obiecta9.
DOUBTS CONCERNING THE TEXT OF THE MASTER.
Doubt I
In this section there are doubts concerning the text, and first about this, that the Master says: Concerning those also, who build wood and stubble1 etc. For it seems through this to understand venial [sins]. But on the contrary: Isaiah five: Woe to you that join house to house etc. The Gloss of Jerome2: «Heretics join doctrines to doctrines; and those who upon the foundation ought to have built gold, silver, and precious stones, on the contrary build wood, hay, and stubble»; but it is established that heretics in the fabrication of their doctrines sin mortally: therefore that [text] is not understood of venial [sins].
Likewise, it is asked by what trope wood and hay and stubble are called venial [sins]; and since there are many differences of venial [sins], how can they be reduced to three?
And it must be answered to this, that one Scripture can be expounded in many ways; yet there is one principal and literal sense, but there can be several by adaptation. But the literal sense, according to what is clear from the Gloss and the following text, is of venial [sins]; Jerome, however, expounds it by a certain adaptation.
If the ground of this sense be asked; it must be said that the Apostle speaks of venial [sins], inasmuch as they are combustible. But the combustible, which furnishes fuel and is consumed by fire, is of a threefold difference.
For there is something which lasts longer, something which is most quickly consumed, something [which is consumed] in a middle manner. In the first manner it is called wood, in the second manner it is called stubble, and in the third manner it is called hay, which holds the middle between either extreme3.
Doubt II
Likewise it is asked about this, that he says: Not without reason did the Apostle distinguish those three: the wood and hay and stubble which they build. For it seems to be said badly, because upon the faith nothing is built except the good: therefore no sin; but venial [sins] are sins: therefore they are in no way built upon [it]. — Likewise, nothing is burned up which is of the spiritual building; but wood and hay and stubble are built upon [it]: therefore they are not burned.
I respond: It must be said that wood and hay and stubble are said to be built upon [the foundation] in a twofold way, according as we can expound [it] in two ways. For by wood can be understood a good work, to which nevertheless is annexed some venial sin, as is clear in many acts; and such a work has from one [aspect] that it is of the building, and has from another [aspect] that it is combustible. For it is built upon by that ground by which it is good on account of the principal intention, but it is burned by that ground by which it has love annexed to earthly things; and it scarcely happens, except in the perfect, that in good works something reprehensible does not fall in from the side. — Otherwise it can be expounded, so that by wood, hay, and stubble venial [sins] are rightly understood, and thus they are said to be built upon [the foundation], not as being of the building, but because they do not subvert the foundation of the building, but stand together with it — not so in mortal sins — and to that extent they are said to be built upon4, yet nonetheless they will be burned.
Doubt III
Likewise it is asked about this, that he says: But those who build gold, silver, precious stones are secure from either fire. For it seems to be said badly, because in gold is understood the contemplation of God, in silver the love of neighbor, in precious stones good works5; but all the just build these: therefore no just one will pass through the purgatorial fire. — If you say that it is understood with precision [i.e. exclusively]; on the contrary: Ecclesiastes seven6: There is none that doeth good and sinneth not: therefore no one builds these precisely [i.e. exclusively].
Likewise it is asked about the sufficiency of these three, and how they are distinguished. For it seems that gold ought rather to be attributed to love than to contemplation, because love is most precious.
I respond: It must be said that the building-up of contemplation, love, and good action is understood through the building of gold and silver and stones with precision, so that the others are not built up7. But then venial [sins] are said to be built up not when they are committed, but when they are converted into use and into habit, as in the love of children and of a wife and the like; and without such habit and use a man can well be, although he cannot avoid certain sins as to the act, as for instance those which arise from stealth or ignorance. Therefore to the perfect alone belongs the building of gold etc., and these are secure.
As to what is asked about the distinction of these, it must be said that one may speak of the ordering of the mind as to the superior part, and thus is understood the contemplation of God; and since this names what is eminent in the soul, it is rightly understood by gold8. But as to the inferior part, in two ways: either as it directs the will into itself, and thus it is the love of neighbor; or as it happens that the will is directed into a work, and thus it is good operation. And the love of neighbor is compared to good operation as silver to precious stones, for the reason that, just as silver is laid under precious stones and is adorned by them, so love [is adorned] by good effects. — And note that in the contemplation of God love is enclosed. And thus the response to the objections is clear9.
- 1Textus huius dubii respicit verba Apostoli I. Cor. 3, 12: «Si quis autem superaedificat super fundamentum hoc, aurum, argentum, lapides pretiosos, ligna, foenum, stipulam». In seqq. ostendit, quod «uniuscuiusque opus quale sit, ignis probabit... Si cuius opus arserit, detrimentum patietur; ipse autem salvus erit; sic tamen quasi per ignem [purgatorium]». Glossa ordinaria in hunc loc. est secundum August., XXI. de Civ. Dei, c. 26. n. 1. seqq. [Vide hic lit. Magistri, c. 2.]. Cfr. Gregor., IV. Dialog. c. 39. — Mox post exponit cod. aa addit de mortalibus.The text of this doubt regards the words of the Apostle, 1 Cor. 3:12: «But if any man build upon this foundation, gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble». In what follows he shows that «every man's work, of what sort it is, the fire shall try... If any man's work burn, he shall suffer loss; but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire [purgatory]». The ordinary Gloss on this passage is according to Augustine, On the City of God XXI, c. 26, nn. 1 ff. [See here the Master's text, c. 2.]. Cf. Gregory, Dialogues IV, c. 39. — Soon after exponit codex aa adds de mortalibus.
- 2Vers. 8. — Glossa sumta est ex Hieron. Commentario in hunc loc.; textus originalis post coniungunt plura addit. Verbis allegatis praemittitur: Iuxta tropologiam contra haereticos quidam hoc dictum arbitrantur etc.Verse 8. — The Gloss is taken from Jerome's Commentary on this passage; the original text after coniungunt adds more. Before the words alleged there is prefixed: According to the tropology certain ones think this was said against heretics, etc.
- 3Idem dub. solvitur ab Alex. Hal., S. p. IV. q. 15. m. 4. a. 1; B. Albert., hic a. 2; S. Thom., hic q. 1. a. 2, ubi etiam duo seqq. dubia tanguntur; Petr. a Tar. (de hoc et 2. seqq. dubiis), hic q. 2. a. 1; Richard. a Med., hic a. 2. q. 4.The same doubt is solved by Alexander of Hales, Summa p. IV, q. 15, m. 4, a. 1; Blessed Albert, here a. 2; St. Thomas, here q. 1, a. 2, where also the two following doubts are touched upon; Peter of Tarentaise (concerning this and the 2 following doubts), here q. 2, a. 1; Richard of Mediavilla, here a. 2, q. 4.
- 4Communissima, sed minus congrua lectio codd. substituit aedificari. — Cfr. hic lit. Magistri, c. 1. seq.; Alex. Hal., S. p. IV. q. 15. m. 4. a. 3. § 1. seq.; B. Albert., hic a. 3.The most common, but less fitting, reading of the codices substitutes aedificari. — Cf. here the Master's text, c. 1 f.; Alexander of Hales, Summa p. IV, q. 15, m. 4, a. 3, § 1 f.; Blessed Albert, here a. 3.
- 5Secundum Glossam ordinariam apud Petr. Lombard. [cfr. etiam hic lit. Magistri, c. 4.] et Lyranum, de qua vide August., de Fide et operibus, c. 16. n. 27 et Enchirid. c. 68. n. 18.According to the ordinary Gloss in Peter Lombard [cf. also here the Master's text, c. 4] and Lyra, concerning which see Augustine, On Faith and Works c. 16, n. 27, and Enchiridion c. 68, n. 18.
- 6Vers. 21: Non est enim homo iustus in terra, qui faciat etc.Verse 21: For there is no just man upon earth, that doeth etc.
- 7Edd. cum non paucis codd. superaedificent.The editions, with not a few codices, [read] superaedificent.
- 8Cod. aa subiungit: quod est eminens circa metalla. Mox post inferiorem edd. cum uno alteroque cod. addunt ordinatur.Codex aa subjoins: which is eminent among metals. Soon after inferiorem the editions, with one or another codex, add ordinatur.
- 9Idem dub. solvunt Alex. Hal., S. p. IV. q. 15. m. 4. a. 1. in fine et a. 3. § 2; B. Albert., hic a. 6.The same doubt is solved by Alexander of Hales, Summa p. IV, q. 15, m. 4, a. 1, at the end, and a. 3, § 2; Blessed Albert, here a. 6.