LIBER PRIMUS SENTENTIARUM -- D. 41: 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 XLI.	DISTINCTION 41
Opera Omnia S. Bonaventurae, Ad Claras Aquas, 1882, Vol 1, pp. 725-727. Cum Notitiis Editorum Quaracchi	Latin text taken from Opera Omnia S. Bonaventurae, Ad Claras Aquas, 1882, Vol. 1, pp. 725-727. Notes by the Quaracchi Editors.
Cap. I. Utrum aliquod sit meritum obdurationis vel misericordiae.	Chapter I. Whether there is anything meriting obduration and/or mercy.
Si autem quaerimus meritum obdurationis et misericordiae, obdurationis meritum invenimus, misericordiae autem meritum non invenimus, quia nullum est misericordiae meritum, ne gratia evacuetur, si non gratis donatur,¹ sed meritis redditur. Miseretur itaque secundum gratiam, quae gratis datur; obdurat autem secundum iudicium, quod meritis redditur. « Unde datur intelligi, ut sicut reprobatio Dei est nolle misereri, ita obduratio Dei sit non misereri, ut non ab illo irrogetur aliquid, quo sit homo deterior, sed tantum quod sit melior non erogetur ».² — Ex his aperte ostenditur, quid misericordiam, quid obdurationem intellexerit Apostolus,³ et quia misericordiae nullum advocat meritum, obduratio vero non est sine merito, sed habet nolle misereri. Et misericordiae verbo hic accipitur praedestinatio, et praecipue praedestinationis effectus, obdurationis vero non ipsa Dei aeterna reprobatio, quia eius nullum est meritum, sed gratiae privatio sive subtractio, quae quodam modo est reprobationis effectus. Accipitur tamen aliquando reprobatio pro obduratione, sicut et praedestinatio pro suo effectu, qui est gratia apposita.⁴ Gratia enim, quae apponitur, effectus est praedestinationis. — Cum igitur gratiae, quae apponitur homini ad iustificationem, nulla sint merita; multo minus et ipsius praedestinationis, qua ab aeterno elegit Deus quos voluit, aliqua possunt existere merita, ita nec reprobationis, qua ab aeterno quosdam praescivit futuros malos et damnandos: sicut elegit Iacob, et Esau⁵ reprobavit, quod non fuit pro meritis eorum, quae tunc haberent, quia nulla habebant, quoniam nec ipsi existebant; nec propter futura merita, quae praevideret, vel illum elegit, vel illum reprobavit.	But if we seek what merits [meritum] obduration and mercy, we find what merits obduration, but we do not find what merits mercy, because there is nothing meriting mercy—lest grace be emptied out—if it is not granted¹ freely, but is rendered according to merits. And so He has mercy according to the grace, which is given freely; but He hardens against (the good) according to the judgment, which is rendered according to merits. « Wherefore it is given to be understood, that just as God’s reprobation is a ‘not wishing to have mercy’, so God’s obduration is a ‘not having mercy’, so that nothing is imposed by Him, by which a man is worse, but there is only not paid out [erogetur] that which is better ».² — From these there is openly shown, what the Apostle³ understood mercy (to be), (and) what (he understood) obduration (to be), and that [quia] he advocates nothing meriting mercy, however obduration is not without merit, but has (as its cause God’s) ‘not wanting to have mercy’. And predestination is accepted here for the word for mercy, and chiefly the effect of predestination, but God’s eternal reprobation itself (is) not (accepted here for the word for) obduration, because there is nothing meriting that, but (obduration is) the privation or subtraction of grace, which in a certain manner is the effect of reprobation. Yet sometimes “reprobation” is accepted for “obduration”, just as even “predestination” (is) for its effect, which is apportioned grace.⁴ For the grace, which is apportioned, is the effect of predestination. — Therefore, since there are no (works) meriting the grace, which is apportioned to a man for justification; much less even (meriting) the predestination itself, by which God from eternity elected whom He wills, there can thus neither exist some meriting the reprobation, by which from eternity He foreknows certain ones (are) going to be wicked and (are) going to be damned: just as He elected Jacob, and reproved Esau,⁵ which was not in virtue of their merits, which they then had, because they had none, since they themselves neither existed; nor on account of the future merits, which He foresaw, did He either elect the former, and/or reprove the latter.
Cap. II. De variis super hoc carnalium opinionibus.	Chapter II. On the various opinions of carnal (men) on this.
Opinati sunt tamen quidam, Deum ideo elegisse Iacob, quia talem futurum praescivit, qui in eum crederet et ei servieret. Quod aliquando Augustinus se sensisse dicit in libro Retractationum,⁶ ubi aperte ostendit, quod si propter futura merita electus esset, iam non ex gratia esset electio. Non ergo ideo electus est a Deo, quia talis futurus erat, sed ex electione talis est factus, ita adicens: « Disputans, quid elegerit Deus in nondum nato, cui dixit, serviturum esse maiorem, et quid in eodem maiore similiter nondum nato reprobaverit, ad hoc perduxi ratiocinationem, ut dicerem: Non ergo elegit Deus opera cuiusquam in praescientia, quae ipse daturus est, sed fidem elegit in praescientia, et quem sibi crediturum esse praescivit, ipsum elegit, sui Spiritum sanctum daret, ut bona operando etiam aeternam vitam consequeretur ». — Ecce hic aperte dicit, non propter opera eum elegisse, sed propter fidem, qua eum praescivit⁷ crediturum. Sed quia et in fide meritum est, sicuti et in operibus, hoc retractavit dicens:⁸ « Nondum diligentius quaesiveram nec adhuc inveneram, qualis sit electio gratiae, de qua dicit Apostolus: Reliquiae per electionem gratiae salvae fient; quae utique non est gratia, si ex meritis procedit, ut iam quod datur non secundum gratiam, sed secundum debitum reddatur potius meritis, quam donetur. Proinde quod continuo dixi: Dicit enim idem Apostolus:⁹ Idem Deus qui operatur omnia in omnibus. Nusquam autem dictum est: Deus credit omnia in omnibus. Ac deinde subiunxi: Quod ergo credimus, nostrum est; quod vero bonum operamur, illus est, qui credentibus dat Spiritum sanctum. Profecto non dicerem, si iam scirem, etiam ipsam fidem inter Dei munera reperiri, quae dantur in eodem spiritu. Utrum- / -que . . .	However certain (authors) have opined, that God had elected Jacob for this reason, because He foreknew that (he was) going to be such, as would believe in Him and serve Him. Which (St.) Augustine says in the book of Retractations,⁶ that he at one time thought, where he openly shows, that if he had been elected on account of (his) future merits, (his) election would already not be out of grace. Therefore, (St. Augustine says that) he was not for this reason elected by God, because he was going to be such, but he was made such out of (his) election, thus adding: « Disputing, what God elected in the one not yet born, whom He said, that the elder [maiorem] will serve, and what similarly He reproved in the same elder, not yet born, to this I have lead the reasoning, to say: “Therefore God in (His) Foreknowledge did not elect anyone’s works, which He himself is going to give (them), but He elected in (His) Foreknowledge (his) faith, and whom He foreknows is going to believe Him, him He elects, to give His own Holy Spirit, so that by working good (works) he might arrive at eternal life” ». — Behold here he openly says, that He did not elect him on account of (his) works, but on account of the faith, by which He foreknew⁷ that he was going to believe. But because there is also merit in faith, just as in works, he retracted this, saying:⁸ « I had not yet more diligently sought nor had I then found, what the election of grace is, concerning which the Apostle says: The remainder shall be saved through the election of grace; which indeed is not a grace, if it proceeds from merits, as that which is already given not according to grace, but is rendered according to a debt to merits, rather than being granted [donatur]. Consequently, that which I said immediately afterwards [continuo]: “For the Apostle⁹ says the same: The same God, who works all in all.” Never, however, was it said: “God credits [credit] all in all.” And then I subjoined: “Therefore, that on which account [quod] we believe, is ours; but the good which we work, is His, who gives the Holy Spirit to (those) believing (in Him).” Indeed I would not say, if I did not already know, that faith itself is found among God’s gifts [munera], which are given in the same spirit. Therefore / each . . .
¹ Vat. et plures edd. cum cod. C donetur . . . reddatur. ² August., I. ad Simplician. q. 2. n. 15. ³ Rom. 9, 18: Ergo cuius vult miseretur, et quem vult indurat. — Paulo inferius codd. B D et ed. 1 addunt semper et legunt non est semper sine merito. Immediate post praeter Vat. aliae edd. omittunt verba sed habet nolle misereri. ⁴ Cod. A gratiae appositio. ⁵ Respicitur ad Malach. 1, 2. 3: Nonne frater erat Esau Iacob, dicit Dominus, et dilexi Iacob, Esau autem odio habui. Cfr. Rom. 9, 13. ⁶ Libr. I. c. 23. n. 2. 3. Rectractatio refertur ad ea quae ipse dixerat in Exposit. Epist. ad Romanos, c. 60. Cfr. I. ad Simplician. q. 2. n. 8, et de Praedst. Sanctor. c. 3. n. 7. — Paulo inferius Vat. cum edd. 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9 ex tali electione talis pro ex electione talis. ⁷ Vat. et aliae edd., excepta 1, praevidit, refragantibus codd. ⁸ Loc. cit. — Locus s. Scripturae est Rom. 11, 5. Ed. August. infra habet: quae utique non est gratia, si eam merita ulla praecedant, ne iam. Vat.: quae utique non ex gratia, si eam merita praecedant. Textum nostrum exhibent edd. 1, 6, 8, cui aliae editiones et nostri codd. consentiunt, nisi quod aliquae edd. habent et ex gratia, aliae ex gratia pro est gratia. ⁹ I. Cor. 12, 6.	¹ The Vatican edition and very many editions, together with codex C, read if it were not granted . . . but is rendered [donetur . . . reddatur] in the subjunctive. ² (St.) Augustine, To Simplicianus, Bk. I, q. 2, n. 15. ³ Rm 9:18: Therefore He has mercy upon whom He will, and He hardens whom He wills [Ergo cuius vult miseretur, et quem vult indurat]. — A little below this codices B and D and edition 1 read is not always without merit [non est semper sine merito]. Immediately after this the Vatican edition and the other editions also omitt the words but has (as its cause God’s) ‘not wanting to have mercy’ [sed habet nolle misereri]. ⁴ Codex A has the apportioning of grace [gratiae appositio]. ⁵ A reference to Mal 1:2-3: “Is Esau not the brother of Jacob?”, says the Lord, and I have loved Jacob, but Esau I have held in hatred [Nonne frater erat Esau Iacob, dicit Dominus, et dilexi Iacob, Esau autem odio habui]. Cf. Rm. 9:13. ⁶ Bk. I, ch. 23, nn. 2 and 3. The retraction refers to those (things) which he said in his Exposition of the Epistle of St. Paul to the Romans, ch. 60. Cf. To Simplicianus, Bk. I, q. 2, n. 8, and On the Predestination of the Saints, ch. 3, n. 7. — A little below this the Vatican edition, together with editions 2, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 9, has such out of such an election [ex tali electione talis] for such out of (his) election [ex electione talis]. ⁷ The Vatican edition and the other editions, except edition 1, foresaw [praevidit], breaking with the codices. ⁸ Loc. cit.. — The passage from Sacred Scripture is Rm. 11:5. The Edition of (St.) Augustine’s (works) has further down: which indeed is not a grace, if any merits precede it, lest presently [quae utique non est gratia, si eam merita ulla praecedant, ne iam]. The Vatican edition has: which indeed (is) not out of grace, if merits precede it [quae utique non ex gratia, si eam merita praecedant]. Our text is exhibited by editions 1, 6, and 8, to which the other editions and our codices consent, except that some editions have (is) also not out of grace [non et ex gratia], others (is) not out of grace [non ex gratia] for is not a grace [non est gratia]. ⁹ 1 Cor. 12:6.

p. 726

Utrum- / -que ergo nostrum est propter arbitrium voluntatis, et utrumque datum est per spiritum fidei et caritatis. — Et quod paulo post dixi: Nostrum enim est credere et velle, illius autem dare credentibus et volentibus facultatem bene operandi per Spiritum sanctum, per quem caritas diffunditur in cordibus nostris,¹ verum est quidem, sed eadem regula et utrumque ipsius est, quia ipse praeparat voluntatem, et utrumque nostrum, quia non fit, nisi volentibus nobis »: ergo et meritum fidei de misericordia Dei venit. Non ergo propter fidem vel aliqua merita elegit Deus aliquos ab aeterno vel apposuit gratiam iustificationis² in tempore, sed gratuita bonitate sua elegit, ut boni essent. Unde Augustinus in libro de Praedestinatione Sanctorum:³ « Non quia futuros nos tales esse praescivit, ideo elegit, sed ut essemus tales per ipsam electionem gratiae suae, qua gratificavit nos in dilecto Filio suo ».	Therefore / each is ours on account of the judgment [arbitrium] of the will, and each has been given through the spirit of faith and charity. — And that which I said a little afterwards: “For it is ours to believe and to will, but His to give to (those) believing and willing the faculty to work well through the Holy Spirit, through whom charity is poured fourth in our hearts”,¹ is indeed true, but by the same rule each is also His, because He prepares (our) will, and each (is) ours, because (each) does not come to be, unless with us willing »: therefore the merit of faith also comes from God’s mercy. Therefore not on account of faith and/or any merits did God elect some from eternity nor apportion the grace of justification² in time, but He has elected by His own gratuitous Goodness, that they would be good. Whence (St.) Augustine (says) in the book On the Predestination of the Saints:³ « Not because He foreknew that they were going to be such, did He for that reason elect (them), but (He elected them) so that they would be such through the election of His grace, by which He has made us pleasing in His Beloved Son ».
His tamen adversari videtur, quod dicit Augustinus⁴ super Malachiam prophetam, ubi scriptum est: Iacob dilexi, Esau autem odio habui: « Cui vult, inquis, miseretur, et quem vult indurat. Sed haec voluntas Dei iniusta esse non potest. Venit enim de ocultissimis meritis, quia et ipsi peccatores cum propter generale peccatum unam massam fecerunt, non tamen nulla⁵ inter eos est diversitas. Praecedit ergo aliquid in peccatoribus, quo, quamvis nondum sint iustificati, digni efficiantur iustificatione. Et item praecedit in aliis peccatoribus, quo digni sunt obtusione ». — Ecce hic videtur Augustinus dicere, quod et ipsa Dei voluntas, qua alios eligit, alios reprobat, ex meritis proveniat,⁶ sed occultissimis, id est, quod pro meritis alios voluerit eligere, alios reprobare, et quod pro meritis aliis apponitur gratia iustificationis, aliis non, unde obtunduntur. Sed quid intelligere voluerit, ignoratur, nisi forte hoc dicatur intellexisse, quod supra diximus eum retractasse. Nam ibidem etiam quaedam alia continue subdit, quae in libro Retractationum⁷ aperte retractat; quod utrumque legenti patebit. Unde verisimile est, in praemissis etiam, hoc retractasse.	However it seems that to these there can be opposed [adversari], what (St.) Augustine⁴ says on the Prophet Malachi, where it is written: Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have held in hatred: « On whom He wills », he says, « He has mercy, and whom He wills, He hardens. But this will of God cannot be unjust. For it comes from the most secret merits [ocultissimis meritis], because sinners themselves, after having made (themselves) one mass on account of the general sin, yet there is among them no⁵ diversity. Therefore something takes precedence [praecedit] among sinners, by which, though they are not yet justified, they are made worthy of justification. And again there takes precedence among other sinners, that by which they are worthy of being dulled [obtusione] ». — Behold here (St.) Augustine seems to say, that the very will of God, by which He chooses some, (and) reproves others, comes about [proveniat]⁶ on account of merits, but most secret ones, that is, that in virtue of merits He willed to elect some, reprove others, and that in virtue of merits the grace of justification is apportioned to some, to others not, whence they are dulled. But what he wanted to understand, is not known, unless perhaps this be said, that he understood, that which we said above he retracted. For in the same place he also subjoined immediately certain other (things), which in the book of Retractations⁷ he openly retracts; which will be clear to one reading each. Whence it is likely [verisimile], that even in the aforementioned, he retracted it.
Quidam tamen ex eo sensu accipiunt fore dictum, non quia aliquis praedestinetur pro meritis vel iustificationis gratiam mereatur, sed quia aliqui non adeo mali sunt, ut mereantur sibi gratiam non impertiri. Nullus enim Dei gratiam mereri potest, per quam iustificatur; potest tamen mereri, ut non apponatur, ut penitus abiiciatur. Et quidem aliqui tantum profundum iniquitatis devenerunt, ut hoc mereantur, ut hoc digni sint; alii vero ita vivunt, ut, etsi non mereantur gratiam iustificationis, non tamen merentur omnino repelli et gratiam sibi subtrahi. Ideoque dixit, in quibusdam peccatoribus precedere quo digni sint iustificatione, et in aliis quo digni sint obtusione. — Sed hoc frivolum est.	However, certain (authors) accept that it is to be said in this sense, not because anyone is predestined in virtue of (his) merits (and/or) merits the grace of justification, but because some are not to such an extent wicked, as to merit that grace is not imparted to them. For no one can merit God’s grace, through which he is justified, yet he can merit, that it not be apportioned, such that he be thoroughly cast off. And indeed some came to so great a depth of iniquity, as to merit this, such that they were worthy of it; but others live thus, even if they do not merit the grace of justification, yet they do not entirely merit to be repelled nor that grace be subtracted from them. And for that reason he said, that among certain sinners there takes precedence that by which they are worthy of justification, and among others that by which they are worthy of being dulled. — But this (understanding) is frivolous.
« Multi vero de isto profundo quaerentes reddere rationem, atque secundum coniecturas cordis sui inscrutabilem altitudinem iudiciorum Dei cogitare conantes, in fabulas vanitatis abierunt dicentes, quod animae sursum in caelo peccant et secundum sua peccata ad corpora pro meritis diriguntur, et dignis sibi quasi carceribus includuntur. Ierunt hi tales post cogitationis suas, et volentes disputare de Dei profundo, versi sunt in profundum, dicentes, animas in caelo ante conversatas et ibi aliquid boni vel mali egisse et pro meritis ad corpora terrena destrusas esse. Hoc autem respuit catholica fides propter evidentem Apostoli sententiam, qua ait:⁸ Cum nondum nati essent, aut aliquid boni vel mali egissent »⁹ etc. Melior est ergo fidelis ignorantia quam temeraria scientia. « Elegit ergo quos voluit gratuita misericordia, non quia fideles futuri erant, sed ut fideles essent, eisque gratiam dedit, non quia fideles erant, sed ut fierent. Ait enim Apostolus:¹⁰ Misericordiam consecutus sum, ut fidelis essem; non ait, quia fidelis eram. Datur quidem et fideli, sed data est etiam prius, ut esset fidelis ». Ita etiam reprobavit quos voluit, non propter merita futura, quae praevideret, veritate tamen rectissima et a nostris sensibus remota.¹¹	« On the other hand, many seeking to give a reckoning concerning this depth, and striving according to the conjectures of their own heart to think of the inscrutable height of God’s judgments, went off into the fables of vanity, saying that souls sin on high in Heaven and according to their sins are directed to bodies in virtue of their merits, and are enclosed in (them) as quasi prisons worthy of them. Such as these went after their own thoughts, and wanting to dispute concerning God’s depth, they were overturned into a depth, saying, that souls lived [conversatas] before in Heaven and there they did something of good and/or evil and in virtue of their merits they were thrust down to earthly bodies. But this the Catholic Faith rejects on account of the evident sentence of the Apostle, by which he says:⁸ When they were not yet born, nor had done anything of good and/or evil »⁹ etc. Therefore, faithful ignorance is better than temerarious knowledge. « Therefore He elected those whom He willed by a gratuitous mercy, not because they were going to be faithful, but so that they would be faithful, and He have them grace, not because they were faithful, but so that they would come to be (such). For the Apostle says:¹⁰ I have laid hold of mercy, so that I may be faithful; he did not say, because I was faithful. He indeed is given and as one faithful, but it has also been given before, so that he would be faithful ». Thus He also reproved those whom He willed, not on account of (their) future merits, which He foresaw, yet by a truth most righteous [rectissima] and removed from our senses.¹¹
Sed quaeritur, utrum, sicut dicitur elegisse quaedam, ut boni fierent et fideles, ita etiam concedi debeat, reprobasse quosdam, ut mali essent et infideles, et obdurare, ut peccent; quod nullatenus concedi oportet. Non enim reprobatio ita est causa mali, sicut praedestinatio est causa boni; neque obduratio ita facit hominem malum, quaemadmodum misericordia facit bonum.	But one askes, whether, must as there is said that He has elected certain ones, so that they would come to be good and faithful, so it ought to be conceded, that He has reproved certain ones, to be wicked and unfaithful, and that He hardens (them) against (the good), so that they sin; which is in no manner necessary [oportet] to be conceded. For reprobation is not thus the cause of evil, as predestination is the cause of good; nor does obduration so make a man wicked, according to the manner which mercy makes (him) good.
Cap. III. An ea quae semel scit Deus vel praescit, semper sciat et praesciat, et semper scierit et praescierit.	Chapter III. Whether those which God once knows and/or foreknows, He always knows and foreknows, and always had known and had foreknown.
Praeterea considerari oportet, utrum ea omnia quae semel scit vel praescit Deus, semper sciat¹² et scierit, ac praesciat et praescierit; an olim scierit vel praescierit quod modo non scit vel praescit. — De praescientia primo respondemus dicentes, multa eum praescisse, quae modo non praescit. Cum enim eius praescientia non sit nisi de futuris, ex quo illa quae futura erant, praesentia fiunt vel praetereunt, sub Dei praescientia esse desinunt, sub scientia vero semper sunt. . . .	Moreover it is necessary [oportet] that one consider, whether all those which God once knows and/or foreknows, He always knows¹² and knew, and foreknows and foreknew; or whether He formerly [olim] knew and/or foreknew what He now does not know and/or foreknow. — Concerning (His) Foreknowledge we first respond, saying, that He foreknew many (things), which He does not now foreknow. For since His Foreknowledge is not but of future (things), out of which those which were going to be, come to be present and/or pass away, cease to be under God’s Foreknowledge, but always are under (His) Knowledge. . . .
¹ Rom. 5, 5. ² Sola Vat. sanctificationis. ³ Cap. 19. n. 38. — Locus s. Scripturae est Ephes. 1, 6. ⁴ Libr. 83 Quaest. q. 68. n. 4. — Loci s. Scripturae sunt Malach. 1, 2. 3, et Rom. 9, 18. Vulgata et August. Cuius vult pro Cui vult. — Vat. et edd. 4, 6, 8, pluribus omissis exhibent: Augustinus lib. 83 Quaestionum: cui vult. ⁵ Ita codd., edd. 1, 6 et originale. Vat. cum pluribus edd. fecerunt: tamen nonnulla inter eos. ⁶ Codd. et ed. 1 veniat. ⁷ Libr. I. c. 26. — Paulo ante Vat. et edd. 4, 6 omittunt etiam ante quaedam alia. ⁸ Rom. 9, 11. 12. Apostolus prosequitur sic: ut secundum electionem propositum Dei maneret, non ex operibus, sed ex vocante dictum est ei: Quia maior serviet minori. ⁹ Quae praecedunt sumta sunt ex August., Serm. 165. c. 5. n. 6, sed nonnullis transpositis vel mutatis. ¹⁰ I. Cor. 7, 25. — Quoad sensum hae propositiones sumtae sunt ex August., I. Retract. c. 23. n. 4, et de Praedest. Sanctor. c. 3. n. 7. ¹¹ Libr. I. de Diversis Quaest. ad Simplician q. 2. n. 16, paucis mutatis. ¹² Vat. et edd. 2, 4, 6, 7, 9 minus congrue scit, sed refraganbitus omnibus codd.	¹ Rm 5:5. ² The Vatican edition alone has of sanctification [sanctificationis]. ³ Chapter 19, n. 38. — The passage from Sacred Scripture is Eph 1:6. ⁴ In his book Eighty-Three Questions, q. 68, n. 4. — The passages from Sacred Scripture are Mal 1:2-3 and Rm 9:18. The Vulgate and (St.) Augustine read: On whom He wills [Cuius vul] for On whom He wills [Vui vult]. — The Vatican edition and editions 4, 6 and 8, having omitted very many (words), exhibit: (St.) Augustine’s book of 83 Questions: on whom He wills [Augustinus lib. 83 Quaestionum: cui vult]. ⁵ Thus the codices, editions 1 and 6, and the original. The Vatican edition, together with very many editions, has yet among them there is not a little [tamen nonnulla inter eos]. ⁶ The codices and edition 1 have comes [veniat]. ⁷ Bk. I, ch. 26. — A little before this the Vatican edition and editions 4 and 6 omit also [etiam]. ⁸ Rm. 9:11-12. The Apostle continues thus: so that God’s proposal according to election might remain, not out of works, but out of the One calling it has been said to him: Because the elder shall serve the younger [ut secundum electionem propositum Dei maneret, non ex operibus, sed ex vocante dictum est ei: Quia maior serviet minori.]. ⁹ What precedes this has been taken from (St.) Augustine’s, 165th Sermon, ch. 5, n. 6, but with not a few things transposed and/or changed. ¹⁰ 1 Cor. 7:25. — In regard to (their) sense these propositions have been taken from (St.) Augustine’s, Retractations, Bk. I, ch. 23, n. 4, and from his On the Predestination of the Saints, ch. 3, n. 7. ¹¹ On Diverse Questions to Simplicianus, Bk. I, q. 2, n. 16, with a few (things) changed. ¹² The Vatican edition and editions 2, 4, 6, 7 and 9 have less congruously does know [scit] in the indicative, but breaking with all the codices.

p. 727

Praescivit ergo Deus omnia ab aeterno, quae futura erant, neque praescire desinit, nisi cum futura esse desinunt. Neque cum praescire desinit aliqua, quae ante praesciebat, minus ea noscit, quam ante cognoscebat. Non enim dicitur ex defectu scientiae eius, quod aliqua praescierit aliquando, quae modo non praesciat, sed ex ratione verbi quod est praescientia. Praescire enim est ante scire, quam fiat aliquid. Ideoque non potest dici Deus praescire, nisi quae futura sunt.

Therefore God foreknew from eternity all, which (things) were going to be, nor does He cease to foreknow, except when the cease to be future. Nor when He ceases to foreknow somethings, which He used to foreknow before, does He know them less, than He cognized (them to be) before. For it is not said from the defect of His Knowledge, that He foreknew somethings at some time, which He does not now foreknow, but (it is said) from the reckoning of the word which is “foreknowledge”. For “to foreknow” is “to know beforehand” how [quam] something comes to be. And for that reason God cannot be said to foreknow, except what are going to be.

De scientia autem aliter dicimus. Scit enim Deus semper omnia quae aliquando scit. Omnem enim scientiam, quam aliquando habet, semper habuit et habet et habebit. — Ad hoc autem opponitur ita: olim scivit, hunc hominem nasciturum, qui natus est, modo non scit, eum nasciturum: scivit ergo aliquid, quod modo non scit; et alia huiusmodi infinita induci possent.¹ — Sed ad hoc dicimus, quod idem de nativitate huius hominis et mundi creatione nunc etiam scit, quod sciebat, antequam fierent, licet tunc et tunc hanc scientiam eius diversis exprimi verbis oporteat. Nam quod tunc futurum erat, nunc praeteritum est; ideoque verba commutanda sunt ad ipsum designandum; sicut diversis temporibus loquentes eandem diem modo per hoc adverbium cras designamus, dum adhuc futura est, modo per hodie, dum praesens est, modo per heri, dum praeterita est. Itaque antequam crearetur mundus, sciebat Deus hunc creandum, postquam creatus est, scit enim creatum. Nec est hoc scire diversa, sed omnino idem de mundi creatione; sicut antiqui patres crediderunt, Christum nasciturum et moriturum, nos autem credimus, eum iam natum et mortuum; nec tamen diversa credimus nos et illi, sed eadem. « Tempora enim, ut ait Augustinus,² variata sunt; et ideo verba sunt mutata, non fides ». Indubitanter igitur teneamus, Deum semper omnia scire, quae aliquando scit.

However of (God’s) Knowledge we speak otherwise. For God knows always all which He knows at any time. For every knowledge, which He at any time has, He always had and has and will have. — But to this there is thus opposed: “He formerly knew, that this man, who has been born, (was) going to be born, (and) now He does not know, that he (is) going to be born: therefore, He knew something, which now He does not know”; and other infinite (objections) of this kind could be brought forward.¹ — But to this we say, that of the nativity of this man and the creation of the world He know also knows, what He used to know, before they came to be, though at that time and this [tunc et tunc] it is necessary to express with diverse words the understanding [sententiam] of this. For what then was going to be, now has passed away; and for that reason (one’s) words are to be commuted to designate this; just as (when) speaking of diverse times we designate the same day now through this adverb “tomorrow”, while it is still future, now through “today”, while it is present, now through “yesterday”, while it is past. And for before the world was created, God used to know that it (was) to be created, before it was created, for He knew (it as) created. Nor is it that He knows diverse (things), but (He knows) entirely the same (thing) concerning the creation of the world; jut as the ancient Fathers believed, that Christ (was) going to be born and going to die; but we believe, that He has already (been) born and (has) died; and yet we and they do not believe diverse (things), but the same (thing). « For the times », as (St.) Augustine says,² « have varied; and for that reasons the words have changed, not the Faith ». Therefore let us hold undoubtedly, that God always knows all, which He at any time knows.

¹ Vat. et aliae edd., excepta 1, dici possunt, contradicentibus codd., quorum tamen codd. A B D possunt pro possent. — De sequente sententia Magistri et Nominalium, quod omnino idem sint propositiones de eadem re, sed sub diversis temporum differentiis prolatae, dicendum, quod est insufficiens et ex parte falsa, cfr. comment. hic a. 2. q. 2. — De eadem re loquitur Magister etiam infra d. XLIV. c. 2.

² In Ioan. tract. 45. n. 9; secundum sensum. — Paulo ante Vat. et edd. 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9 omittunt iam ante natum et mortuum.

¹ The Vatican and the other editions, except edition 1, have can be said [dici possunt], contradicting the codices, (some) of which, however, (such as) codices A B and D have can [possunt] for could [possent]. — Of the following sentence of Master (Peter) and the Nominalists, that they are entirely the same propositions concerning the same thing, but proffered under diverse difference of times, it must be said, that (this explanation) is insufficient and in part false, cf. (St. Bonaventure’s) Commentary, here in a. 2, q. 2. — Master (Peter) speaks of the same matter also below in d. XLIV, ch. 2.

² On the Gospel of St. John, tract 45, n. 9, according to (its) sense. — A little before this the Vatican edition and editions 2, 3, 4, 7, 8 and 9 omit already [iam] before (been) born and (has) died [natum et mortuum].

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