Dist. 44, Part 2, Dubia
Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 44
DUBIA CIRCA LITTERAM MAGISTRI.
Dub. I.
In parte ista sunt dubitationes circa litteram, et primo super hoc quod dicit: Illud investigari oportet, utrum monstra resurgant. Quaeritur de monstris et de gigantibus, utrum resurgant. Et quod sic, videtur, quia nihil debet deperire6 humanae naturae. — Item, quomodo poterunt evenire huiusmodi moles tam magnae de corporibus hominum, cum nati fuerint ex Adam?
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod monstra non resurgent, pro eo quod non est ibi naturae veritas, sed potius error; unde si sunt magnitudinis giganteae in via, in patria non erunt.
Si vero quaeras: unde habuerunt ortum? dicendum, quod, sicut narrat Iosephus7, daemones incubi, assumtis corporibus, generant, et daemon ostendit mulieri, cum qua concubuit, figuram talem hominis maximi; et ideo tum propter seminis multiplicationem, tum propter virtutem animalem generatus fuit homo mirae magnitudinis, et ille postmodum alios generat. — Si quaeras: quomodo daemon generare potest, cum solus «homo generet hominem8»? ad hoc potest responderi, quod daemon, prius assumta p. 936 effigie mulieris, se ipsum subiicit viro et ipsum semen susceptum transfundit et conservat, sicut novit per aliqua remedia, ne calor et spiritus evanescant. — Sed hoc totum magis est coniecturae quam rationis rectae1.
Dub. II.
Item de hoc quod dicit, quod absit, ut illum bimembrem, quem nuper etc.; quaeritur, quando aliquis est in parte bimembris, in parte habet membra unita2, utrum debeat resurgere unus, vel duo, quia, qua ratione debet resurgere unicus, videtur, quod duo, et e converso. — Item, similis casus est, quando est hermaphroditus et natus in utroque sexu; quaeritur, in quo debeat resurgere, quia qua ratione resurget in uno, et in altero: ergo vel resurget in neutro, vel in utroque.
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod de monstro, quod in parte habet duo membra, in parte unum, in parte distincta, in parte unita, distinguendum est: quia aut habet distinctionem in membris principalibus et unionem in non principalibus, aut e converso. Si habet distinctionem in membris principalibus, sunt ibi duae animae, et tunc resurgent duo corpora; si autem habet unitatem in illis, distinctionem in aliis, resurget unum corpus.
Ad illud quod quaeritur de hermaphrodito, dicendum, quod secundum naturam impossibile est, quod sit omnino indifferens, sicut dicunt medici3, quamvis discerni non possit; et ideo debet resurgere in eo sexu, qui dominatur per naturam.
Si vero quaeratur de monstro, quod partim est homo, partim bestia; dicendum, quod si partes principales sunt hominis, si vixit, habuit animam humanam, et ideo ordinatum est ad resurrectionem, et resurget homo secundum totum4.
---
DOUBTS CONCERNING THE TEXT OF THE MASTER.
Doubt I.
In this part there are doubts concerning the text, and first upon this which he says: It must be investigated whether monsters rise again. The question concerns monsters and giants, whether they rise again. And that they do, it seems, because nothing ought to perish6 of human nature. — Likewise, how could masses so great arise from the bodies of men, since they were born from Adam?
I respond: It must be said that monsters will not rise again, for the reason that there is no truth of nature there, but rather error; hence, if they are of gigantic size on the way, in the fatherland they will not be so.
But if you ask: whence did they have their origin? it must be said that, as Josephus7 relates, incubus demons, having assumed bodies, generate; and the demon shows to the woman with whom he has lain such a figure of a very great man; and therefore, both on account of the multiplication of the seed and on account of the animal power, a man of wondrous size was generated, and he afterwards generates others. — If you ask: how can a demon generate, since only «man generates man8»? to this it can be answered that the demon, having first assumed p. 936 the effigy of a woman, subjects himself to a man and transfers and preserves the seed received, as he knows how by certain remedies, lest the heat and spirit evaporate. — But all this is a matter of conjecture rather than of right reasoning1.
Doubt II.
Likewise concerning this which he says, that far be it, that the two-membered one, whom recently etc.; it is asked, when someone is in part two-membered, [and] in part has members united2, whether he ought to rise as one, or as two — since, by the reasoning by which he ought to rise as a single one, it seems [he should rise as] two, and conversely. — Likewise, a similar case is when there is a hermaphrodite, born in both sexes; it is asked, in which he ought to rise, since by the reasoning by which he would rise in the one, [he would rise] also in the other: therefore either he will rise in neither, or in both.
I respond: It must be said that concerning the monster which in part has two members, in part one, in part distinct, in part united, a distinction must be made: for either it has distinction in the principal members and union in the non-principal ones, or conversely. If it has distinction in the principal members, there are two souls there, and then two bodies will rise; but if it has unity in those, [and] distinction in the others, one body will rise.
To that which is asked concerning the hermaphrodite, it must be said that according to nature it is impossible that it be wholly indifferent, as the physicians say3, although it cannot be discerned; and therefore it ought to rise in that sex which dominates by nature.
But if it be asked concerning the monster which is partly man, partly beast; it must be said that if the principal parts are those of a man, if it lived, it had a human soul, and therefore it is ordained to the resurrection, and the man will rise according to the whole4.
---
- 6Cod. S. addit de veritate. Inferius pro poterunt codd. E I K potuerunt.Codex S adds de veritate ("of the truth"). Below, for poterunt codices E I K read potuerunt.
- 7Libr. I. de Antiq. Iud. c. 5. Cfr. tom. II. pag. 219, nota 4.Book I On the Antiquities of the Jews, c. 5. Cf. vol. II, p. 219, note 4.
- 8Aristot., VII. Metaph. text. 22. (VI. c. 7.). — Inferius pro aliqua remedia cod. B aliqua media, cod. C aliqua animalia (plures codd. amicitia, cod. O sacrificia, cod. M alia), codd. I K aliquam vim, codd. N aa aliquas astutias. Cfr. II. Sent. d. 8. p. I. a. 3. q. 1, ubi hac de re agens S. Bonav. ait: Quadam sagacitate ipsum [semen] in sua virtute custodiunt etc.Aristotle, Metaphysics VII, text 22 (VI, c. 7). — Below, for aliqua remedia ("certain remedies") codex B [reads] aliqua media, codex C aliqua animalia (several codices amicitia, codex O sacrificia, codex M alia), codices I K aliquam vim, codices N aa aliquas astutias. Cf. II Sent., d. 8, p. I, a. 3, q. 1, where, treating of this matter, St. Bonaventure says: By a certain shrewdness they preserve the [seed] itself in its own power, etc.
- 1Idem dub. solvunt B. Albert., hic a. 44; Richard. a Med., hic circa lit.The same doubt is resolved by Blessed Albert, here a. 44; Richard of Middleton, here on the text.
- 2Ita recte cod. F, in aliis et edd. divisa; infra pro videtur, quod cod. U ea ratione et.So rightly codex F; in the others and the editions, divisa; below, for videtur, quod codex U [reads] ea ratione et.
- 3Cfr. Avicenna, III. Canon. Fen 20. tr. I. c. 43.Cf. Avicenna, Canon III, Fen 20, tr. I, c. 43.
- 4Vide de hoc dubio S. Thom., hic circa lit.See on this doubt St. Thomas, here on the text.