LIBER PRIMUS SENTENTIARUM -- D. 37: Petri Lombardi

Magistri Petri Lombardi Arch. Episc. Parisiensis	Master Peter Lombard Archbishop of Paris
Sententiarum Quatuor Libri	The Four Books of Sentences
LIBER PRIMUS SENTENTIARUM. DE DEI UNITATE ET TRINITATE	THE FIRST BOOK OF THE SENTENCES ON THE UNITY AND TRINITY OF GOD
DISTINCTIO XXXVII.	DISTINCTION 37
Opera Omnia S. Bonaventurae, Ad Claras Aquas, 1882, Vol 1, pp. 632-636. Cum Notitiis Editorum Quaracchi	Latin text taken from Opera Omnia S. Bonaventurae, Ad Claras Aquas, 1882, Vol. 1, pp. 632-636. Notes by the Quaracchi Editors.
PARS. I.	PART I
Cap. I. Quibus modis dicitur Deus esse in rebus.	Chapter I. In what manners God is said to be in things.
Et quoniam demonstratum est ex parte, quomodo omnia dicantur esse in Deo, addendum videtur hic, quibus modis dicitur Deus esse in rebus, si tamen id humana mens vel ex parte digne valeat cogitare, vel lingua sufficat eloqui. — Sciendum ergo est, quod Deus, incommutabiliter semper in se existens, praesentialiter, potentialiter, essentialiter est in omni natura sive essentia sine sui definitione, et in omni loco sine circumscriptione, et in omni tempore sine mutabilitate. Et praeterea in sanctis spiritibus et animabus est excellentius, scilicet per gratiam inhabitans, et in homine Christo excellentissime, in quo plenitudo divinitatis corporaliter inhabitat, ut ait Apostolus.¹ In eo enim Deus habitavit non per gratiam adoptionis, sed per gratiam unionis. Ne autem ista, quia capacitatem humanae intelligentiae excedunt, falsitatis arguere aliqui praesumant, Sanctorum auctoritatibus munienda mihi videntur. Beatus Gregorius super Cantica Canticorum:² « Licet Deus communi modo omnibus rebus insit praesentia, potentia, substantia, tamen familiariori modo dicitur inesse per gratiam illis, qui mirificentiam operum Dei acutius et fidelius considerant ». De hoc enim eodem Augustinus ad Dardanum³ in libro de Praesentia Dei ait: « Cum Deus sit natura incorporea et incommutabiliter viva, aeterna stabilitate in se ipso manens, totus adest rebus omnibus, et singulis totus; sed in quibus habitat habent eum pro suae capacitatis diversitate, alii amplius, alii minus, . . .	And since it has been demonstrated on the one hand [ex parte], in what manner all (things) are said to be in God, it seems that there must be added here, in what manners God is said to be in things, supposing , nevertheless, that [si tamen] the human mind for its part [ex parte] is even strong enough to think worthily of it, and/or the tongue sufficient to speak (of it). — Therefore, it must be known, that God, existing incommutably always in Himself, is by means of (His) presence, power, (and) Essence in every nature or essence without His own limitation [sine sui definitione], and in every place without circumscription, and in every time without mutability. And, moreover, He is in holy spirits and souls in a more excellent manner, namely, through indwelling grace, and in the Man Christ in a most excellent manner, in Whom the fullness of the Divinity indwells corporally, as the Apostle says.¹ For in Him God dwelt, not through the grace of adoption, but through the grace of union. Moreover, so that none may presume to accuse these of falsehood, because they exceed the capacity of human intelligence, they seem to me that (they must) be fortified by the authorities of the Saints. Blessed Gregory (the Great), On the Canticle of Canticles (says):² « Though God is in all things in a common manner according to presence, power, and substance, yet He is said in a more familiar manner to be through grace in those, who consider more keenly [acutius] and faithfully the wonderfulness [mirificentiam] of God’s works ». For of this same (passage) (St.) Augustine says to Dardanus³ in the book on the presence of God: « Since God is an incorporeal nature and (is) incommutably alive, remaining in Himself by an eternal stability, He is present [adest] whole to all things, and whole to each; but they in whom He dwells, have Him in virtue of their own diversity of capacity, some more fully, some less, . . .
¹ Colos. 2, 9. ² Errat Magister citando Gregorium, cum male intellexerit glossam ordinarium (ad Cantica 5, 17), cuius tantum pars est ex Gregorio, illa verba autem non. Hunc errorem Magistri secuti sunt cum aliis Scholasticis etiam S. Bonav., hic p. I. a. 3. q. 2. arg. 1, et S. Thom., S. I. q. 8. a. 3; cfr. De Rubeis, Dissertationes, dissert. 31. c. 1. ³ Epist. 187. c. 6. n. 19.	¹ Col. 2:9. ² Master (Peter) errs in citing (Pope St.) Gregory (the Great), since he badly understood the Ordinary Gloss (on Cant. 5:17), only part of which is from (St.) Gregory, the other words not so. This error of Master (Peter) was followed by the other Scholastics, even St. Bonaventure, here in p. I, a. 2, q. 2, 1st argument, and St. Thomas, Summa., I, q. 8, a. 3; cf. De Rubeis, Dissertationes, dissertation 31, ch. 1. ³ Epistle 187, ch. 6, n. 19.

p. 633

quos ipse sibi dilectissimum templum gratia suae bonitatis aedificat ». Hilarius quoque in libro octavo de Trinitate¹ apertissime docet, Deum esse ubique: « Deus, inquit, immensae virtutis, vivens potestas, quae nusquam non adsit, nec desit usquam, se omnem per sua edocet, ut ubi sua sint, ipse esse intelligatur. Non autem corporali modo, cum alicubi sit, non etiam ubique esse credatur, cum et in omnibus esse non desinat ». Ambrosius, in primo libro de Spiritu sancto,² Spiritum sanctum probat non esse creaturam, quia ubique est, quod est proprium divinitatis, ita dicens: « Cum omnis creatura certis naturae suae sit circumscripta limitibus, quomodo quis audeat creaturam appellare Spiritum sanctum, qui non habet circumscriptam determinatamque virtutem, quia³ et in omnibus et ubique semper est? quod utique divinitatis et dominationis est proprium ». Idem in eodem:⁴ « Domini est omnia complere, qui dicit: Ego caelum et terram compleo. Si ergo Dominus est qui caelum complet et terram, quis ergo potest Spiritum sanctum iudicare dominationis et divinae potestatis exsortem, qui replevit orbem? et quod plus est, replevit et Iesum, totius mundi Redemptorem ». Ex his aliisque pluribus auctoritatibus aperte monstratur, quod Deus ubique in omni creatura essentialiter, praesentialiter, potentialiter est.	whom He Himself builds up by the grace of His Goodness as a most beloved temple for Himself ». (St.) Hilary (of Poitiers) also teaches most openly in the eighth book On the Trinity,¹ that God is everywhere: « The God », he says, « of immense virtue, the living Power, which is nowhere not at hand [adsit], nor is ever missing [desit], by Himself instructs thoroughly [edocet] all through His own, so that where His own are, He Himself is understood to be. But though He is nowhere in a corporal manner, not even everywhere He is believed to be, though He also does not cease to be in all ». (St.) Ambrose, in the first book On the Holy Spirit,² proves that the Holy Spirit is not a creature, because He is everywhere, which is proper to Divinity, saying thus: « Since every creature has been circumscribed by certain limits of its own nature, in what manner does anyone dare to name the Holy Spirit a creature, He who does not have a circumscribed and determined virtue, because³ He is both in all and always everywhere? which indeed is proper to divinity and lordship [dominationis] ». The same (says) in the same (book):⁴ « It belongs to the Lord to fill completely [complere] all, He who says: I fill Heaven and Earth. If, therefore, the Lord is He who fills Heaven and Earth; who, therefore, can judge that the Holy Spirit (has) no share in divine lordship and power, He who fills the world again? and what is more, (who) has also filled Jesus, the Redeemer of the whole world ». From these and very many other authorities there is openly demonstrated, that God is everywhere in every creature, by means of (His) Essence, presence, (and) power.
Cap. II. Quod Deus non, ubicumque est, habitat, sed e converso.	Chapter II. That God does not dwell, wheresoever He is, but the other way around.
In sanctis vero etiam habitat, in quibus est per gratiam. Non enim, ubicumque est, ibi habitat, ubi vero habitat, ibi est. In solis bonis habitat, qui sunt templum eius et sedes eius. Unde per Isaiam⁵ Dominus ait: Caelum mihi sedes est, terra autem scabellum pedum meorum, quia in electis, qui sunt caelum, habitat Deus et regnat, qui eius voluntati devoti obtemperant; malos vero, qui sunt terra, iudicii districtione calcat. Unde etiam in libro Sapientiae⁶ dicitur: Thronus sapientiae anima iusti, quia in iustis specialius est quam in aliis rebus, in quibus tamen omnibus totus est. « Quemadmodum anima, ait Augustinus in Epistola ad Hieronymum⁷ de origine animae, per omnes particulas corporis tota adest simul, nec minor in minoribus, nec in maioribus maior, sed tamen in aliis intensius, et in aliis remissius operatur, cum in singulis particulis corporis essentialiter tota sit »; ita et Deus, cum sit in omnibus essentialiter ac totus, in illis tamen plenius esse dicitur, quos inhabitat, id est, in quibus ita est, ut faciat eos templum suum. Et hi tales cum eo sunt iam ex parte, sed in beatitudine perfecte; mali vero, etsi ibi sint, ubi ipse est, qui nusquam deest, non tamen sunt cum eo. Unde Augustinus super Ioannem:⁸ « Non satis fuit dicere: Ubi ego sum, et illi sint, sed addidit mecum, quia et miseri possunt esse, ubi et ille est, qui nusquam deest; sed Beati sunt cum illo, quia non sunt beati nisi ex eo ». Cum⁹ illo sunt qui fruuntur eo et vident illum, sicut est; mali vero non sunt cum illo, ut caeci in luce non sunt cum luce. Nec boni ita nunc sunt cum eo, ut videant per speciem, etsi sunt aliquomodo cum eo per fidem. Quomodo autem Deus habitet in bonis, ex illis aliquatenus intelligere valebis, quae supra¹⁰ dicta sunt, cum de Spiritus sancti processione temporali ageretur, ubi, licet ex parte, exponitur — ex parte enim cognoscimus, et ex parte prophetamus — quomodo Spiritus sanctus habitet in nobis, qui non sine Patre et Filio inhabitat.	On the other hand, He also dwells in the Saints, in whom He is through grace. For not, wheresoever He is, does He dwell there, but where He does dwell, there He is. He dwells in the good alone, who are His temple and His seat [sedes]. Whence through Isaiah⁵ the Lord says: Heaven is My seat, but Earth the footstool for My Feet, because in the Elect, who are a heaven, God dwells and reigns, the devout who submitted to His Will; but the wicked, who are an earth, He treads upon by separating them for judgment [iudicii districtione]. Whence there is also said in the Book of Wisdom:⁶ A throne of Wisdom the soul of the just, because He is more especially in the just than in other things, in which all, however, He is whole. « According to which manner the soul », says (St.) Augustine in (his) Letter to Jerome⁷ on the origin of the soul, « is at once present whole in all the subparts [particulas] of the body, neither less in (those) lesser, nor greater in (those) greater, but yet works more intensely in some, and more remissly in others, though in each subpart of the body it is essentially whole », thus God too, since He is in all essentially and whole, yet He is said to be more fully in those, in whom He indwells, that is, in those He is thus, that He makes them His own temple. And these such are with Him already in part [ex parte], but (shall be) perfectly in beatitude; but the wicked, even if they are, where He Himself is, Who is nowhere missing, yet they are not with Him. Whence (St.) Augustine On (the Gospel of St.) John (says):⁸ « It was not enough to say: Where I am, they too are, but He added with Me, because even the wretched can be, where He too is, who is nowhere missing; but the Blessed are with Him, because they are not but the blessed of Him [ex eo] ». With⁹ Him are they who enjoy Him and see Him, just as He is; but the wicked are not with Him, as the blind, in the light, are not with the light. Nor are the good thus now with Him, to see (Him) through a vision [speciem], even if they are in some manner with Him through faith. Moreover, in what manner God dwells in the good, we shall prevail to understand to some extent from those (things), which have been said above,¹⁰ when the temporal procession of the Holy Spirit was dealt with, where, though in part [ex parte], there is expounded — for we know in part, and we prophesy in part — in what manner the Holy Spirit dwells in us, He who indwells not without the Father and the Son.
Cap. III. Ubi erat Deus, antequam esset creatura.	Chapter III. Where God was, before there was a creature.
Si autem quaeris, ubi habitabat Deus, antequam Sancti essent; dicimus, quia in se habitabat. Unde Augustinus in libro contra Maximinum:¹¹ « In templo, inquit, suo habitat Deus », « scilicet in Sanctis, qui sunt templum Dei modo secundum fidem ambulantes; et templum Dei erunt aliquando etiam secundum speciem, qualiter etiam nunc templum Dei sunt Angeli. Sed dicit aliquis: antequam faceret Deus caelum et terram, antequam faceret Sanctos, ubi habitabat? In se habitabat Deus, apud se habitabat, et apud se est. Non ergo Sancti sic sunt domus Dei, ut , ea substracta, cadat Deus; immo sic sunt domus Dei, ut, ea subtracta, cadat Deus; immo sic habitat Deus in Sanctis, ut, si ipse discesserit, cadant ».	But if you ask, where did God dwell, before the Saints were; we say, that He dwelt in Himself. Whence (St.) Augustine in (his) book Against Maximinus says:¹¹ « God dwells in His own temple », « namely in the Saints, who are God’s temple now, walking (as they do) according to the Faith; and (who) also shall at last be the temple of God according to vision [speciem], in which manner the Angels are now the temple of God. But someone says: before God made Heaven and Earth, before He made the Saints, where did He dwell? God dwelt in Himself, He dwelt with Himself, and He is with Himself. Therefore the Saints are not thus the house of God, that, with them subtracted, God falls; nay they are thus the house of God, that, if He should depart, they fall ».
« Sciendum est etiam, quia, ut ait Augustinus in libro ad Dardanum,¹² dici nisi stultissime nequit, Spiritum sanctus non habere locum in nostro corpore, quod totum anima nostra impleverit. Stultius etiam dicitur, angustiis alicubi impediri Trinitatem, ut Pater et Filius et Spiritus sanctus alicubi simul esse non possint ». « Verum illud est multo mirabilius, quod cum Deus ubique sit totus, non tamen in omnibus . . .	« It must also be known, that », as (St.) Augustine says in (his) book to Dardanus,¹² « there cannot be said, except in a most stupid manner, that the Holy Spirit does not have a place in our body, the whole of which our soul fills. There is also more stupidly said, that the Trinity is impeded somewhere by narrow (places), so that the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit cannot be together in some place ». « However, much more wonderful is this, that since God is everywhere whole, yet He does not dwell / in all.
¹ Num. 21. ² Cap. 7. n. 81. ³ Edd. 1, 3, qui; Vat. cum aliis edd. perperam quae. ⁴ Ibid. n. 86. — Locus s. Scripturae est Ier. 23, 24. Vulgata: Nunquid non caelum et terram ego impleo? ⁵ Cap. 66, 1. Vulgata: Caelum sedes mea etc. ⁶ Respicitur Sap. 7, 27: Sapientia in animas sanctas se transfert, et c. 9, 10: ut mecum sit et mecum laboret. ⁷ Epist. 166. c. 2. n. 4. ⁸ Tract. 111.n. 2. — Locus s. Scripturae est Ioan. 17, 24. — Quae sequuntur tantum secundum sensum sumta sunt ex n. 3. et 2. ⁹ Vat. cum aliis edd. addendo quod coniungit hanc propositionem cum ipso textu Augustini. Paulo post cod. D et ed. 1 mali non cum illo, non in luce, sed nec cum luce (ed. 1 autem omittit sed et addit sunt post nec). Cod. A mali vero non sunt cum illo, non in luce, non sunt cum luce; cod. B mali vero cum illo ut in luce non sunt cum luce; cod. E mali vero non cum illo et in luce non sunt. Retinuimus lectionem Vaticanae et aliarum edd. ¹⁰ Dist. XIV. — Locus s. Scripturae est I. Cor. 13, 9. ¹¹ Libr. II. c. 21. n. 1, et deinde Enarrat. in Psalm. 122, 1, n. 4. In quo textu plurimae edd. cum Vat. omittunt etiam post aliquando; et deinde contra originale et edd. 3, 5, 7, 8 Vat. aliaeque edd. apud te habitat pro apud se habitabat. ¹² Epist. 187. c. 4. n. 15, et c. 5. n. 16. — In fine locus s. Scripturae est Matth. 6, 9, et Luc. 11, 2.	¹ Number 21. ² Chapter 7, n. 81. ³ Editions 1 and 3 have who [qui] for because He [quia]; the Vatican edition, together with the other editions, has faultily which (virtue) [quae]. ⁴ Ibid., n. 86. — The passage from Sacred Scripture is Jer. 23:24. The Vulgate reads: Do I not fill Heaven and Earth? [Nunquid non caelum et terram ego impleo?]. ⁵ Is. 66:1. The Vulgate reads: Heaven is My seat etc. [Caelum sedes mea etc.]. ⁶ A reference to Wis. 7:27: Wisdom transfers Herself into holy souls [Sapientia in animas sanctas se transfert], and Wis. 9:10: so that She may be with me and work with me [ut mecum sit et mecum laboret]. ⁷ Epistle 166, ch. 2, n. 4. ⁸ Tract 111, n. 2. — The passage from Sacred Scripture is Jn. 17: 24. — What follows is only taken according to sense from (St. Augustine, ibid.,) nn. 3 and 4. ⁹ The Vatican edition, together with the other editions, by adding (before this) wherefore[quod], conjoins this proposition with the text of (St.) Augustine. A little after this codex D and edition 1 have but the wicked (are) not with Him, (are) not in the light, but neither (are they) with the light [mali non cum illo, non in luce, sed nec cum luce], but edition 1 omits but [sed] and has explicitly are they [sunt] just after it. Codex A has but the wicked are not with Him, not in the light, (and) are not with the light [mali vero non sunt cum illo, non in luce, non sunt cum luce]; codex B reads but the wicked (though they are) with Him, as in the light, are not with the light [mali vero cum illo ut in luce non sunt cum luce]; codex E has but the wicked (are) not with Him and are not in the light [mali vero non cum illo et in lluce non sunt]. We have retained the reading of the Vatican edition and of the other editions. ¹⁰ In Distinction XIV. — The passage from Sacred Scripture is 1 Cor. 13:9. ¹¹ Book II, ch. 21, n. 1, and then Enarrations on the Psalms, Ps. 122:1, n. 4. In which text very many editions, together with the Vatican edition, omit also [etiam] after the semicolon of the first sentence; and then contrary to the original and to editions 3, 5, 7, and 8, the Vatican edition and the other editions have He dwells with you [apud te habitat] for He dwelt with Himself [apud se habitabit]. ¹² Epistle 187, ch. 4, n. 15, and ch. 5, n. 16. — At the end the passage from Sacred Scripture is Mt. 6:9, and Lk. 11:2.

p. 634

habitat. Quis porro audeat opinari, nisi inseparabilitatem Trinitatis penitus ignoret, quod in aliquo possit habitare Pater et Filius, in quo non habitet Spiritus sanctus, aut in aliquo Spiritus sanctus, in quo non habitet Pater et Filius? Fatendum est igitur, ubique esse Deum per divinitatis praesentiam, sed non ubique per inhabitationis gratim. Propter hanc enim inhabitationem gratiae non dicimus: Pater noster, qui est ubique, cum et hoc verum sit; sed qui est in caelis », id est in Sanctis, in quibus est quodam excellentiori modo.	dwell / in all. Furthermore who dares to opine, except (the one who) is thoroughly ignorant of the inseparability of the Trinity, that the Father and the Son can dwell in someone, in whom the Holy Sprit dwells not, or (that) in someone the Holy Spirit (dwells), in whom the Father and the Son do not dwell? It must be said, therefore, that God is everywhere through the presence of Divinity, but not everywhere through the grace of indwelling. For on account of this indwelling of grace we do not say: Our Father, who art everywhere, though this too is true; but who art in the Heavens », that is in the Saints, in whom He is in a certain more excellent manner.
« Illud quoque mirabile est, quia, ut ait Augustinus in eodem,¹ Deus est inhabitator quorundam nondum cognoscentium Deum, et non quorundam cognoscentium Deum. Illi enim ad templum Dei non pertinent, qui cognoscentes Deum, non sicut Deum glorificant. Ad templum Dei pertinent parvuli sanctificati Sacramento Christi et regenerati Spiritu sancto, qui nondum valent cognoscere Deum. Igitur quem potuerunt illi nosse nec habere, isti potuerunt habere, antequam nosse. Beatissimi autem sunt illi, quibus hoc est Deum habere quod nosse ». — Hic aliquatenus aperit Augustinus, quomodo Deus habitet in aliquo, id est habeatur, cum videlicet ita est in aliquo, ut ab eo cognoscatur et diligatur.	« Wonderful too is this, that », as (St.) Augustine says in the same (book),¹ « God is an indweller in certain ones who do not yet know [quorundam cognoscentium] God, and (is) not (an indweller) in certain ones who do know God. For the latter do not pertain to the temple of God, who knowing God, do not glorify (Him) as God. To the temple of God there does pertain the little ones sanctified by the Sacrament of Christ and regenerated by the Holy Spirit, who are not yet able to know God. Therefore, Him whom the former could have known and did not have, these could have had, before they (could have) known. Moreover most blessed are those, for whom to have God is that which (it is) to know (Him) ». — Here (St.) Augustine reveals [aperit] to some extent, in what manner God dwells in someone, that is, is had (by someone), when, namely, He is thus in someone, as to be cognized and loved by him.
Ex praedictis patet, quod Deus ubique totus est per essentiam et in Sanctis habitat per gratiam. Cumque superius, licet tenuiter, ostensum sit, qua ratione dicatur habitare in quibusdam, efflagitaret² ordinis ratio, id etiam assignari, quomodo ubique per essentiam et totus sit, nisi huius considerationis sublimitas atque immensitas humane mentis sensum omnino excederet. Ut enim ait Chrysostomus super Epistolam ad Hebraeos:³ « Sicut multa de Deo intelligimus, quae loqui penitus non valemus; ita multa loquimur, quae intelligere non sumus idonei, verbi gratia, quod ubique Deus est, scimus et dicimus; quomodo autem ubique sit, intellectu non capimus. Item, quod est incorporea quaedam virtus, quae omnium est causa bonorum, scimus, quomodo autem, vel quae ista sit, penitus ignoramus ».	From the aforesaid it is clear, that God is everywhere whole through essence and dwells in the Saints through grace. And since it has been shown above, though briefly [tenuiter], by which reckoning He is said to dwell in certain ones, a reckoning of order would demand,² that there also be assigned, in what manner He is everywhere and whole through essence, if the sublimity and immensity of this consideration did not entirely exceed the sense of the human mind. For as (St. John) Chrysostom says On the Epistle to the Hebrews:³ « Just as we understand many (things) of God, which we do not prevail to express thoroughly; so we express many (things), which we are not fit [idonei] to understand, v. g., we know and say, that God is everywhere; but in what manner He is everywhere, we do not grasp by (our) intellect. Likewise, we know that there is a certain incorporeal virtue, which is the cause of all the good, but in what manner, and/or what that is, we are thoroughly ignorant ».
Quidam tamen, immensa ingenio suo metiri praesumentes, hoc ita fore intelligendum tradiderunt, quod Deus ubique esse per essentiam dicitur, non quod Dei essentia proprie sit in omni loco et in omni creatura, sed quia omnis natura atque omne quod naturaliter est, in quocumque loco sit, per eum habet esse, et omnis locus, in quo illud est. Iidem⁴ etiam dicunt, ideo Deum ubique dici esse per praesentiam vel per potentiam, quia cuncta loca sunt ei praesentia, et quae in eis sunt, nec in eis aliquid operari cessat. Nam et ipsa loca, et quiquid in eis est, nisi ipse conservet, manere non possunt. In eis ergo per substantiam Deus esse dicitur, ut aiunt, quia per virtutem propriae substantiae facit, ut etiam loca sint, et omnia quae in eis sunt. — Sed licet haec vera sint, quae asserunt in explanandis intelligentiis praedictorum, in illis tamen verbis, quibus dicitur Deus ubique esse per essentiam, plus contineri credendum est; quod homo vivens capere non valet.	However, certain (authors), presuming to measure by their own immense genius, have handed down that this is thus to be understood, that God is said to be everywhere through essence, not that God’s Essence properly is in every place and in every creature, but because every nature and everything which naturally is, in whatsoever place it be, and every place, in which He is, has “being” through Him. The same also say,⁴ that God is said to be everywhere through presence and/or through power for this reason, that all [cuncta] places are present to Him, and (because) those which are in them, He does not cease to also work something in them. In them, therefore, God is said to be through substance, as they say, because through the virtue of His own Substance He causes (these) places and all, which are in them, to be. — But though these (things), which they assert in explaining the understanding of the aforesaid, are true, yet in those words, by which God is said to be everywhere through essence, more must be believed to be contained; which man, while alive [vivens], is not able to grasp.
Cap. IV. Quod Deus, cum sit in omnibus rebus essentialiter, non tamen coinquinatur sordibus rerum.	Chapter IV. That God, though He is in all things essentially, yet is not completely befouled with sordid things.
« Solet etiam ab eisdem quaeri, quomodo Deus substantialiter insit omnibus rebus, et corporalium sordium inquinationibus non contingatur. Quod tam frivolum est, ut nec responsione sit dignum, cum etiam spiritus creatus sordibus corporis⁵ etiam leprosi vel quantumcumque polluti inquinari non possit. Sed quoque radios suos sine sui pollutione effundit super loca et corpora non solum munda, sed etiam immunda ac sordibus foetentia, quorum contactu homines ac quaedam aliae res inficiuntur; solis vero radii impolluti et incontaminati, ea contingentes, existunt. Non est igitur mirandum, si essentia divina omnino simplex et incommutabilis omnia replet loca, et omnibus creaturis essentialiter inest, nec tamen cuiusquam rei sordibus contaminetur vel contingatur ». Unde Augustinus in libro de Natura boni:⁶ « Cum in Deo, inquit, sint omnia quae condidit, non tamen inquinant eum illi qui peccant. De cuius etiam sapientia, quae attingit a fine usque ad finem fortiter, dicitur: Attingit omnia propter suam munditiam, et nihil inquinatum in eam incurrit.⁷ « Timent quidam quod fieri non potest, scilicet ne humana carne veritas et substantia Dei inquietur; et tamen praedicant, istum visibilem solem radios suos per omnes faeces et sordes spargere, et eos mundos et sinceros servari. Si ergo visibilia munda a visibilibus immundis contingi possunt et non inquinari, quanto magis invisibilis et incommutabilis Veritas »?	« There is also customarily asked by the same, in what manner is God substantially in all things, and is not contacted by the foulness [inquinationibus] of sordid bodies. Which is so frivolous, as to not even be worthy of a response, since even a created spirit cannot be befouled by the sordid (things) of a body,⁵ even one leprous and/or however so polluted. But even (the Sun) pours forth its own rays, without being itself polluted [sine sui pollutione], upon places and bodies not only clean, but even unclean and stinking with sordid (things), by contact with which men and certain other things are infected; however, the rays of the Sun, contacting them, exist unpolluted and uncontaminated. It is, therefore, not to be wondered, if the Divine Essence, entirely simple and incommutable, (which) fills all places again, and is in all creatures essentially, is yet not even contaminated and/or contacted by the filth of whatever thing ». Whence (St.) Augustine in the book On the Nature of the Good (says):⁶ « Though in God », he says, « are all which He established, yet those who sin do not befoul Him. Of whose Wisdom too, which reaches from end unto end mightily, there is said: She stretches to all on account of Her own cleanliness, and incurs nothing foul in Her: « Some indeed fear that which cannot come to pass [fieri], namely, that by human flesh the Truth and Substance of God be befouled; and yet they preach, that this visible Sun scatters its own rays through all dung [faeces] and sordid (things), and keeps [servari] them clear and pure [sinceros]. If, therefore, clean visible (things) can be contacted by unclean visible (things) and not be befouled, how much more (can) the invisible and incommutable Truth » (not be)?
Postremo respondeant, quid potius de Deo respondendum existiment: vel quod nusquam per essentiam sit, vel quod ubique, vel alicubi, ita quod non ubique? Sed quis audeat dicere, quod nusquam divina essentia sit, vel quod alicubi, et non ubique sit? Si enim ita est alicubi, quod non ubique, ergo localis est. Est ergo ubique tota, quae continet totum et penetrat totum, quae nec pro sui simplicitate dividi, nec pro sui puritate maculari, nec pro sui immensitate ullo modo comprehendi potest. Unde Augustinus:⁸ Deus ubique est, cui non locis, sed actionibus propinquamus.	Finally let them say in response [respondeant], what they estimate rather must be said in response of God: either that He is nowhere through essence, and/or that (He is) everywhere, and/or somewhere, such that (He is) not everywhere? But who dares to say, that the Divine Essence is nowhere, and/or that It is somewhere, and not everywhere? For if It is thus somewhere, that (It is) not everywhere, therefore It belongs to a place [localis est]. Therefore, everywhere whole is that which contains the whole and penetrates the whole, which can neither in virtue of Its own Simplicity be divided, nor in virtue of Its own Purity be stained, nor in virtue of Its own Immensity be in any manner comprehended. Whence (St.) Augustine (says):⁸ God is everywhere, Whom we approach not by places, but by actions.
¹ Cap. 6. n. 21. — In textu respicitur ad Rom. 1, 21: Qui cum cognovissent Deum, non sicut Deum glorificaverunt. ² Vat. cum pluribus edd. praemittit nunc. ³ Homil. 2. n. 1. ⁴ Ita cod. D; codd. A B E Ipsi idem; omnes edd. non bene Idem. ⁵ Vat. aliaeque edd., excepta 1, cum cod. C corporeis. Infra sola Vat. repleat loca pro replet loca, et insit pro inest. Denique plurimae edd. contaminatur et contingitur pro contaminetur et contingatur. ⁶ Cap. 29. Etiam quae praecedunt a verbis Solet etiam sumta sunt secundum sensum ex August. de Agone christiano c. 18. n. 20. ⁷ Primus locus respicit Sap. 8, 1; secundus ibid. 7, 25. — Quae sequuntur usque incommutabilis Veritas sumta sunt ex August. de Agone christiano, c. 18. 20. Hic textus in codd. A B C D et nonnullis edd. ponitur in fine capituli; in ed. 7 legitur ad marginem; in ed. 9 ante Unde Augustinus. Videtur igitur, eum esse potius notulam in secunda editione huius libri additam. Cfr. supra pag. 529, nota 5. Nihilominus eum non removimus a loco, quem in Vat. et ed. 8 obtinet. ⁸ Enarrat. in Psalm. 34, serm. 2. n. 6; et I. de Doctrina christ. c. 10. n. 10.	¹ Chapter 6, n. 21. — In the text the reference is to Rm. 1:21: Who, when they had known god, did not glorify (Him) as God [Qui cum cognovissent Deum, non sicut Deum glorificaverunt]. ² The Vatican edition, together with very many editions, prefaces this with now [nunc]. ³ Homily 2, n. 1. ⁴ Thus codex D; codices A B and E have They themselves also say the same [Ipsi idem etiam dicunt]; all the editions have not well They also say the same [Idem eitam dicunt]. ⁵ The Vatican edition and the other editions, except ed. 1, together with codex C, read of the body [corporeis] for of a body [corporis]. Below the Vatican edition alone has in the final sentence of the quote the subjunctive form for the verbs in its first two clauses. Then very many editions have the indicative forms of the final two verbs in the same sentence. ⁶ Chapter 29. Even those (words), which precede this paragraph have been taken according to sense from (St.) Augustine, On Christian Warfare, chs. 18, n. 20. ⁷ The first passage is a reference to Wis. 8:1; the second to Wis. 7:25. — Those (words) which follow up to Truth [Veritas] have been taken from (St.) Augustine, On Christian Warfare, chs. 18 and 20. This text is placed in codices A B C and D, and not a few editions, at the end of the chapter; in edition 7 it is read in the margin; in edition 9 it is before Whence (St.) Augustine [Unde Augustinus]. Therefore it seems, that it is rather a brief note added in the second edition of this book. Cf. above D. XXXI, p. 529, footnote 5. Nevertheless we have not removed it from the place, which it obtains in the Vatican edition and in edition 8. ⁸ Enarrations on the Psalms, Ps. 34, sermon 2, n. 6; and On Christian Doctrine, Bk. I, ch. 10, n. 10.

p. 635

PARS. II.	PART II
Cap. V. Cum Deus sit ubique et semper, non tamen localis, nec loco nec tempore movetur.	Chapter V. Since God is everywhere and always, yet (does) not belong to a place, He is moved neither according to place nor according to time.
Cumque divina natura veraciter et essentialiter sit in omni loco et in omni tempore, non tamen movetur per loca vel per tempora,¹ nec localis est, nec temporalis. Localis non est, quia penitus non circumscribitur loco, quia nec ita est in uno loco, quod non sit in alio, neque dimensionem habet, sicut corpus, cui secundum locum assignatur principium, medium et finis, et ante et retro, dextra et sinistra, sursum et deorsum, quod sui interpositione facit distantiam circumstantium.	And since the Divine Nature is truly and essentially in every place and in every time, yet is not moved through places and/or through times,¹ nor belongs to a place, nor to a time. It does not belong to a place, because It is not thoroughly circumscribed by a place, because It is also, thus, not in one place, that It is not in another, nor does It have a dimension, just as a body (does), to which according to place there is assigned a beginning, middle, and end, and a before and behind, a right and left, an up and down, which (body) by its own interposition sets itself off from its surrounding [facit distantiam circumstantium].*
Cap. VI. Quidbus modis aliquid dicatur locale vel circumscriptibile.	Chapter VI. In what manners is something said (to belong) to a place, and/or (be) circumscribable.
Duobus namque his modis dicitur in Scriptura aliquid locale sive circumscriptibile, et e converso, scilicet vel quia dimensionem capiens longitudinis, alititudinis et latitudinis distantiam facit in loco, ut corpus; vel quia loco definitur ac determinatur, quoniam, cum sit alicubi, non ubique invenitur; quod non solum corpori, sed etiam omni creato spiritui congruit. Omne igitur corpus omni modo locale est; spiritus vero creatus quodam modo est localis, et quodam modo non est localis. Localis quidem dicitur, quia definitione loci terminatur, quoniam cum alicubi praesens sit, totus alibi non invenitur; non autem ita localis est, ut dimensionem capiens, distantiam in loco facit. Divina igitur sola essentia omnino illocalis et incircumscriptibilis est, quae nec locis movetur aliquo modo — scilicet vel determinatione finita, vel dimensione suscepta — nec temporibus, scilicet affectu et cognitione. His enim duobus modis, scilicet loco vel tempore, fit mutatio creaturae, quae longe est a Creatore. Unde Augustinus super Genesim:² « Deus, inquit, omnipotens, incommutabili aeternitate, voluntate, veritate semper idem, movet per tempus creaturam spiritualem; movet etiam per tempus et locum creaturam corporalem, ut eo moto naturas, quas condidit, administret. Cum ergo tale aliquid agit, non debemus opinari eius substantiam, qua Deus, est, temporibus locisque mutabilem sive per tempora et loca mobilem, cum sit ipse et interior omni re, quia in ipso sunt omnia; et exterior omni re, quia ipse est super omnia; et antiquior omnibus, quia ipse est ante omnia; et novior omnibus, quia ipse idem est post omnia », scilicet post omnium initia. — Ecce hic aperte ostenditur, quod nec locis nec temporibus mutatur vel movetur Deus. Spiritualis autem creatura per tempus movetur, corporalis vero etiam per tempus et locum.	For in these two manners something is said in Scripture (to belong) to a place or (be) circumscribable, and vice versa, namely either because grasping a dimension of length, height and width, it sets itself off in place, as a body; and/or because it is delimited [definitur] and determined according to place, since, when it is somewhere, it is not found everywhere; which befits not only a body, but also every created spirit. Therefore, every body belongs to a place in every manner; but in a certain manner a created spirit belongs to a place, and in a certain manner it does not belong to a place. Indeed it is said (to belong) to a place, because it is terminated by the delimitation [definitione] of a place, since when it is present to somewhere, the whole is not found elsewhere; however it does not thus belong to a place, that grasping a dimension, it sets itself off in a place. Therefore, the Divine Essence alone belongs entirely to no place [omnino illocalis] and is uncircumscribable, nor is It moved in any manner according to places — that is either by a finite determination, and/or by an undertaken dimension — nor according to times, that is, in affection and cognition. For in these two manners, namely, according to place and time, change comes to be in a creature [creaturae], which is far from the Creator. Whence (St.) Augustine says On Genesis:² « The Omnipotent God », he says, « always the Same according to (His) incommutable Eternity, Will, (and) Truth, moves a spiritual creature through time; He also moves a corporal creature through time and place, so that by that movement He might administer the natures, which He established. Therefore, since He does something such, we ought not opine that His Substance, by which He is God, is, according to times and places, mutable, or through times and places mobile, since He Himself is also interior to every thing, because in Him are all; and exterior to every thing, because He is above all; and anterior to all, because He is before all; and newer than all, because He is the same after all », that is after the beginnings of all. — Behold here there is openly shown, that God is changed and/or moved neither according to places nor according to times. Moreover a spiritual creature is moved through time, but a corporal one also through time and place.
Cap. VII. Quid sit mutari secundum tempus.	Chapter VII. What is it to be changed according to time.
Mutari autem per tempus est variari secundum qualitates interiores vel exteriores, quae sunt in ipsa re, quae mutatur, ut quando suscipit vicissitudinem gaudii, doloris, scientiae, oblivionis, vel variationem formae sive alicuius qualitatis exterioris. Haec enim mutatio, quae fit secundum tempus, variatio est qualitatum, quae fit in corporali vel spirituali creatura, et ideo vocatur tempus.	Moreover ‘to change through time’ is to vary according to the interior and/or exterior qualities, which are in the thing itself, which is changed, such as when it undertakes an alteration in [vicissitudinem] joy, sorrow, knowledge, forgetfulness, and/or a variation of form or of any exterior quality. For this change, which comes to be according to time, is a variation of qualities, which comes to be in a corporal and/or spiritual creature, and for that reason is called the season (of the thing).
De mutatione vero loci magna inter conquirentes disceptatio versatur. Sunt enim qui dicunt, nullum spiritum aliquo modo posse mutari loco, ab omni spiritu locum univeraliter removere volentes, quoniam secundum dimensionem tantum et circumscriptionem locum constare asserunt, atque id solum locale vel in loco esse dicunt, quod dimensionem recipit et distantiam in loco facit. Et quod dicunt Augustinum sensisse, mutationem temporis tantum spirituali creaturae tribuentem, loci vero et temporis corporeae.	However, concerning change of place a great debate exists [versatur] among inquirers [conquirentes]. For there are those who say, that no spirit can in any manner be changed according to place, wanting (as they do) to remove place universally from every spirit, since they assert that a place is established only according to dimension and circumscription, and say that that belongs only to a place and/or is in a place, which receives dimension and sets itself off in a place. And they say that (St.) Augustine thought, that a change of time is only to be attributed to a spiritual creature, but of place and of time to a corporeal one.
Sed, ut supra³ diximus, dupliciter dicitur res esse localis vel circumscriptibilis, scilicet vel quia dimensionem recipit et distantiam facit, vel quia loci termino definitur, quorum utrumque convenit corporeae creaturae, alterum vero tantum spirituali. Nam, ut supra diximus, corporalis creatura ita est localis vel circumscriptibilis, quod determinatur defninitone loci, et quod dimensionem recipiens distantiam facit; spiritualis vero tantum definitione loci concluditur, cum ita sit alicubi, quod non alibi; sed nec dimensionem recipit, nec distantiam in loco facit, quia si multi spiritus essent hic, non eo coangustarent locum, quo minus de corporibus contineret. Ideoque Augustinus attribuit mutationem loci corpori, non spiritui, quia licet spiritus transeat de loco ad locum, non tamen ita, ut dimensionibus circumscriptus, interpositione sui faciat distantiam circumstantium, sicut corpus.	But, as we have said above, a thing is said to belong to a place and/or be circumscribable in a twofold manner, namely, either because it receives a dimension and sets itself off, and/or because it is delimited by a terminus of place, each of which convenes with a corporeal creature, but the latter of the two with a spiritual one only. For, as we have said above, a corporal creature belongs to a place and/or is circumscribable thus, that it is determined by a delimitation of place, and because it receives dimension it sets itself off; but a spiritual one is only enclosed by the delimitation of a place, since it is thus somewhere, that (it is) not elsewhere; but it neither receives a dimension, nor sets itself off in place, because if there were many spirits here, there would not by this crowd [coangustarent] the place, by which it would contain fewer bodies [minus de corporibus]. And for that reason (St.) Augustine attributes a change of place to a body, not to a spirit, because though a spirit passes from place to place, yet not thus, that being circumscribed by dimensions, it would by its interposition set itself off from its own surroundings, just as a body (does).
Cap. VIII. Utrum spiritus creati sint locales et circumscriptibiles.	Chapter VIII. Whether created spirits belong to a place and are circumscribable.
Sunt ergo spiritus creati in loco et transeunt de loco ad locum, et quodam modo locales et circum- / -scriptibiles	Therefore created spirits are in a place and pass from place to place, and in a certain manner (they belong) to a place and are / circumscribable . . .
¹ Sumta sunt haec secundum sensum ex August., VIII. de Genes. ad lit. c. 20. n. 39. 40. ² Libr. VIII. c. 26. n. 48. ³ Hic c. 6.	¹ These (words) have been taken according to sense from (St.) Augustine, On a Literal Exposition of Genesis, Bk. VIII, ch. 20, nn. 39 and 40. ² In Bk. VIII, ch. 26, n. 48. ³ Here in ch. 6.
	* [Trans. note: See this idiom in the Rationale for the Translation of Peculiar Latin Terms, in the Introduction to this English translation.]

p. 636

circum- / -scriptibiles sunt, sed non omni eo modo, quo creaturae corporeae. Spiritus autem increatus, qui Deus est, in loco quidem est et in omni loco, sed omnino illocalis et incircumscriptibilis est. Unde Beda super Lucam¹ ait: « Cum ad nos Angeli veniunt, sic exterius implent ministerium, ut tamen ante Deum interius per contemplationem assitant, quia, etsi Angelus est spiritus circumscriptus, summus tamen spiritus, qui Deus est, incircumscriptus est, intra quem currit Angelus, quocumque mittatur ». — Ecce hic dicitur, quia spiritus angelicus circumscriptus est, spiritus autem, qui Deus est, incircumscriptus. Alibi etiam Ambrosius, distantiam ostendens inter spiritum increatum et spiritum creatum, dicit, Seraphim de loco ad locum transire, ita inquiens in libro de Trinitate:² « Dixit Isaias: Quia missus est ad me unus de Seraphim. Et Spiritus quidem sanctus missus dicitur, sed Seraphim ad unum, Spiritus vero ad omnes. Seraphim mittitur in ministerio, Spiritus operatur mysterium. Seraphim de loco ad locum transit — non enim complet omnia — sed ipse repletur a Spiritu ». Hic aperte monastratur, quod Angeli quodam modo locales sunt.	circumscribable, but not in every many, in which corporeal [corporeae] creatures (are). But the uncreated Spirit, who is God, is indeed in a place and in every place, but belongs entirely to no place and (is) uncircumscribable. Whence (St.) Bede (the Venerable) On (the Gospel of St.) Luke¹ says: « When the Angels come to us, they thus fulfill (their) ministry exteriorly, that they yet assist before God interiorly through contemplation, because, even if an Angel is a circumscribed spirit, yet the Most High Spirit, who is God, is uncircumscribed, within Whom the Angel runs, wheresoever he is sent ». — Behold, here there is said, that an angelic spirit is circumscribed, but the Spirit, who is God, (is) uncircumscribed. In other place even (St.) Ambrose , showing the distance between the uncreated Spirit and a created spirit, says, that the Seraphim pass from place to place, thus saying in (his) book On the Trinity:² « Isaiah said: Because there was sent to me one of the Seraphim. And indeed the Holy Spirit is said (to be) “sent”, but the Seraphim (are sent) to one, (the Holy) Spirit, however, to one. The Seraphim are sent in ministry, (the Holy) Spirit works a mystery. The Seraphim pass from place to place — for he does not completely fill all — but he himself is filled again by (the Holy) Spirit ». Here there is openly demonstrated, that the Angels in a certain manner belong to places.
Cap. IX. Quod Deus est ubique sine locali motu.	Chapter IX. That God is everywhere without local movement.
Fateamur itaque, divinam naturam pro immensitate sui nusquam deesse, eamque solam omnino illocalem et incircumscriptibilem nullo concludi loco, sed a fine usque ad finem attingere,³ non tamen spatiosa magnitudine nec locali motu, sed immensitate atque immobilitate suae essentiae. Unde Augustinus ad Dardanum⁴ ait: « Non quasi spatiosa magnitudine opinemur Deum per cuncta diffundi, sicut humus aut lux ista diffunditur, sed potius sicut in duobus sapientibus, quorum alter altero corpore grandior est, sed sapientior non est, una sapientia est, nec est in maiore maior, nec in minore minor, nec minor in uno quam in duobus; ita Deus, sine labore regens et continens mundum, in caelo totus est, in terra totus, et in utroque totus, et nullo contentus loco, sed in se ipso ubique totus ». Idem quoque super Psalmum⁵ ait: « Ad Verbum Dei pertinet non esse in parte, sed ubique esse per se ipsum. Haec est enim sapientia Dei, quae attingit a fine usque ad finem fortiter, non tamen motu locali, sed immobilitate sui: veluti si moles aliqua saxea impleat aliquem locum, dicitur, quod attingit a fine illius loci usque ad finem, cum tamen alterum non deserat alterum occupando. Non ergo habet motum localem Verbum illud, et Sapientia illa solida est et ubique ». — Ex praedictis innotescit, quod Deus est ita ubique per essentiam, quod nec spatiosa magnitudine diffunditur, nec, uno deserto loco, alium occupat, quia localem motum non habet. Ideoque Augustinus, volens praescindere⁶ a Dei puritate omnem localem motum et localem circumscriptionem, potius dicit, omnia esse in illo, quam ipsum esse alicubi, nec tamen ipsum esse locum, qui non est in loco, in libro Octoginta trium Quaestionum⁷ ita inquiens: « Deus non alicubi est. Quod alicubi est continetur loco, quod continetur loco corpus est; Deus autem non est corpus: non igitur alicubi est. Et tamen, quia est et in loco non est, in illo sunt potius omnia, quam ipse alicubi; nec tamen ita in illo, ut ipse sit locus. Locus enim in spatio est, quod longitudine et latitudine et altitudine corporis occupatur; nec Deus tale aliquid est. Et omnia igitur in ipso sunt, et locus non est, locus tamen Dei, sed improprie, dicitur templum Dei, non quod eo contineatur. Id autem nihil melius quam anima munda intelligitur ». — Ecce hic dicit, Deum non esse in loco. Sed intelligendum est, eum non esse in loco localiter, scilicet quia nec circumscriptionem nec localem motum habet.	And so let us say, that the Divine Nature in virtue of Its own immensity is nowhere missing, and that It alone, belonging entirely to no place and uncircumscribable, is enclosed by no place, but reaches from end unto end,³ yet not by a spacious magnitude nor by a local movement, but by the immensity and immobility of Its own Essence. Whence (St.) Augustine says to Dardanus:⁴ « We do not opine that God is diffused through all (places) as if by a spacious magnitude, just as soil or light is according to this diffused, but rather just as in two wise men, the one of which is grander in body than the other, but is not wiser, there is one wisdom, and it is neither greater in the greater, nor lesser in the lesser, nor lesser in one than in the two; so God, without labor ruling and containing the world, is whole in Heaven, whole on Earth, and whole in each, and contained by no place, but in Himself whole everywhere ». The same also says on the Psalm:⁵ « To the Word of God there pertains not ‘being in part’, but ‘being everywhere through Himself’. For this is the Wisdom of God, who reaches from end unto end mightily, yet not by local movement, but by His own immobility: just as if (when) any rocky mass fills up any place, it is said, that it reaches from (one) end of that place unto the (other) end, yet though it does not desert the one by occupying the other. Therefore that Word has no local movement, and that Wisdom is unmoving [solidus] and everywhere ». — From the aforesaid it is known, that God is thus everywhere through essence, that He is neither diffused by a spacious magnitude, nor, having deserted one place, does He occupy the other, because He has no local movement. And for that reason (St.) Augustine, wanting to prescind⁶ every local movement and local circumscription from God’s purity, says rather, that all are in Him, rather than that He is somewhere, and yet that He is not a place, Who is in no place, thus saying in the book of Eighty-Three Questions:⁷ « God is not somewhere. What is somewhere is contained by a place, what is contained by a place is a body, but God is not a body: therefore He is not somewhere. And yet, because He is and is not in a place, all are in Him rather than He (is) somewhere; and yet (they are) not thus in Him, that He is a place. For a place is in a space, which is occupied by the length and width and height of a body, and God is not such a something. Therefore, all are also in Him, and He is not a place, yet the place of God is said (to be), though [sed] improperly, God’s temple, not that by which He is contained. Moreover, this is understood (to be) nothing better than a clean soul ». — Behold here he says, that God is not in a place. But it must be understood, that He is not in a place locally, that is, because He has neither a circumscription nor local movement.
Ad hoc autem solet opponi sic: Quotidie fiunt creaturae, quae ante non erant, et in eis Deus est, cum ante non esset in eis: est ergo ubi ante non erat, ideoque mutabilis videtur. — Sed licet quotidie incipiat esse in creaturis, in quibus ante non erat, quia illae non erant; hoc tamen fit sine sui mutatione, qualiter in mundo coepit esse, quem fecit, tamen sine sui mutabilitate; similiter et desinit esse, in quibus ante erat, sine sui mutatione, nec tamen ispe deserit locum, sed locus desinit esse.	But to this there is customarily opposed thus: Everyday creatures are made, which before were not, and God is in them, though He was not in them before: therefore He is where He was not before, and for that reason He seems (to be) changeable. — But though everyday He begins to be in creatures, in which He was not before, because they were not; yet this comes to be without His own change, in in the manner which He began to be in the world, which He made, yet without His own mutability; similarly He ceases to be, in those which were before, without His own change, and yet He Himself does not desert a place, but the place ceases to be.
Iam sufficienter demonstratum videtur, quomodo omnia dicantur esse in Deo, et Deus in omnibus; quam disceptationem quasi incidenter suscepimus, quia id videbatur postulare res, circa quam noster versabatur sermo. Disserebamus enim de scientia sive sapientia Dei, et cum diceremus,⁸ Deum scire omnia, quaesitum est, utrum propter cognitionem, quam de omnibus habet, dicerentur omnia esse in Deo, an alia ratione hoc diceret Scriptura. Huius ergo quaestionis occasio in praemissam nos deduxit disputationem.	It seems already that (there has been) sufficiently demonstrated, in what manner all are said to be in God, and God in all; which debate we have undertaken quasi incidentally, because the matter, about which our discourse turned, seemed to demand it. For we were speaking in an orderly manner of the Knowledge and Wisdom of God, and though we said,⁸ that God knows all, it was asked, whether on account of the Cognition, which He has of all, all were said to be in God, or whether Scripture said this for another reason. The occasion of this question, therefore, led us into the aforesaid disputation.
¹ Cap. 1. Haec verba (cum paucis locutionibus variantibus) Beda sumsit ex S. Gregorio, Homil. 34. in Evang. ² Vel potius I. de Spiritu sancto, c. 10. n. 115, et c. 11. n. 116. — Locus s. Scripturae est Isai. 6, 6: et volavit ad me etc. — In textu Ambrosii codd. A B C ter habent Seraph pro Seraphim. In fine capituli Vat. cum plurimis edd. ostenditur pro monstratur. ³ Respicitur Sap. 8, 1. ⁴ Epist. 187. c. 4. n. 11. — In quo textu Vat. aliaeque edd. fumus loco humus, refragantibus omnibus codd., edd. 1, 8 et originali, in quo legitur: sicut humus, ut humor, aut aër, aut lux ista diffunditur. ⁵ Enarrat. in Psal. 147. n. 22, sed multa a Magistro hic et in praecedente loco omissa sunt. ⁶ Codd. A B C E praevidere. ⁷ Quaest. 20. — Vat. cum paucis edd. Quod enim alicubi pro Quod alicubi. Circa finem textus post locus non est omnes edd., excepta Vat., addunt nec in loco est, sed refragantibus codd. et originali. ⁸ Codd. A D et edd. 2, 3, 7, 8, 9 doceremus.	¹ In chapter 1. (St.) Bede has taken these words, with a few variations of expression, from St. Gregory (the Great’s), Homilies on the Gospels, Homily 34. ² Or rather On the Holy Spirit, Bk. I, ch. 10, n. 115, and ch. 11, n. 116. — The passage from Sacred Scripture is Isaiah 6:6: and there flew to me etc. [et volavit ad me etc.]. — In the text of (St.) Ambrose codices A B and C have thrice Seraph [Seraph] for Seraphim [Seraphim]. [Trans. note: In the last two occurrences Master Peter seemingly employs Seraphim as a collective, with singular forms of the verb, and thus these verbs are rendered in the plural in English, since collective nouns in English require this.] At the end of the chapter, the Vatican edition, together with very many editions has shown [ostenditur] for demonstrated [monstratur]. ³ A reference to Wis. 8:1. ⁴ Epistle 187, ch. 4, n. 11. — In which text the Vatican edition and the other editions have smoke [fumus] for soil [humus], breaking with all the codices, with editions 1 and 8, and with the original, in which there is read: just as soil, as humor, or air, or light is diffused by this. ⁵ Enarrations on the Psalms, Ps. 147, n. 22, but many (words) have been omitted here and in the preceding passage by Master Peter. ⁶ Codices A B C and E have foresee [praevidere]. ⁷ In Question 20. — The Vatican edition, together with a few editions, has at the beginning of the second sentence of this quote For what [Quod enim] instead of What [Quod]. Near the end after He is not a place [locus non est] all the editions, except the Vatican, add nor is He in a place [nec in loco est], but breaking with the codices and the original. ⁸ Codices A and D, and editions 2, 3, 7, 8, and 9 have we taught [doceremus].

The English translation here has been released to the public domain by its author. The / symbol is used to indicate that the text which follows appears on the subsequent page of the Quaracchi Edition. The translation of the notes in English corresponds to the context of the English text, not that of the Latin text; likewise they are a freer translation than that which is necessitated by the body of the text. Items in square [ ] brackets contain Latin terms corresponding to the previous English word(s), or notes added by the English translator. Items in round ( ) brackets are terms implicit in the Latin syntax or which are required for clarity in English.

Sententiarum Quatuor Libri

The Four Books of Sentences