title: Dist. 24, Part 1, Art. 1, Q. 1

source_text:
<!-- page 608 -->

### Articulus I. *De ordinis signaculo.*
### Quaestio I. *Utrum ordinandi debeant tonsurari sive coronari.*

> The numbered footnotes below correspond to markers in both the Latin body above and the English translation. Quaracchi restarts footnote numbering on each printed page; here notes 1–10 are the footer of p. 608 and notes 11–19 the footer of p. 609 (see Notes).

Quantum ad primum ostenditur, quod non debeant clerici *tonsurari*.

1. Ieremiae quadragesimo nono[^1] comminatur Dominus his: *Dispergam eos in omnem ventum, qui attonsi sunt in comam:* si ergo Dominus hoc detestatur, videtur etc.

2. Item, ad Galatas ultimo[^2]: *In Christo Iesu neque circumcisio aliquid valet neque praeputium, sed nova creatura:* ergo nihil valet in nova lege capillos tondere.

3. Item, caesaries a natura data est in decorem[^3]; sed omnia gratuita salvant ea quae sunt de decore naturae: ergo in nullo Sacramento videtur deponenda caesaries.

Item, videtur, quod non debeant *coronari*:

4. Primum, quia veritas debet respondere figurae; sed, ut Magister[^4] dicit, ista capillorum amotio in voto Nazaraeorum fuit praefigurata; sed illi non faciebant coronam, sed totaliter radebant, sicut dicitur Numerorum sexto: ergo etc.

5. Item, amotio capillorum significat amotionem superfluorum[^5]: si ergo non pars superfluitatis, sed tota abiicienda est; videtur, quod totum caput radendum sit.

6. Item, coronae signaculo consueverunt signari stulti[^6]; sed clericos non decet nisi signum sanctitatis et honestatis: ergo videtur, quod nullo modo debeant coronari.

Quaeritur igitur, quae est ratio, quare tonsurantur et coronantur *clerici*; et quae sit differentia inter coronam et tonsuram; *et rursus, quare conversi religiosi* tonsuram recipiant, sed non coronam. — Quaeritur etiam, quare in huius Sacramenti susceptione potius consignantur fideles quam in susceptione alterius Sacramenti?

### Conclusio.
> **Conclusio.** Clericos tonsurari cum corona conveniens est ad distinctionem et eruditionem.

**Respondeo:** Dicendum, quod, sicut infra[^7] melius videbitur, in Sacramento ordinis datur potestas ad illud nobile officium exsequendum, et haec non omnibus datur nec omnibus dari debet; ideo oportet, personas hoc officium suscipientes primo consignari, et hoc signaculo, quod ostendat *distinctionem*, et quod etiam sit in *eruditionem*. Nullum autem ita conveniens est, ut tonsura cum corona: primo ratione *situs*, quia in superexcellenti parte debet hoc signaculum poni, ut significetur officium nobilitatis, ad quod[^8] parati sunt. Secundo vero, quia tonsura inferior cum rasura superiori circularem figuram faciunt in capillatura; et illa appellari potest corona, quae significat, eos parari ad regale sacerdotium, secundum illud primae Petri secundo[^9]: *Vos estis genus electum, regale sacerdotium;* ideo signaculum regale rectissime eis competit ad *distinguendum*.

Competit nihilominus ad *erudiendum*; et hoc, quia in talis signaculi collatione est superfluitatis *amotio*, est summitatis capitis *denudatio*, est figurae orbicularis *impressio*. — In primo instruuntur clerici, quid sit *vitandum*, quoniam superfluitas terreneitatis, secundum illud Apostoli primae ad Timotheum ultimo[^10]: *Habentes alimenta, et quibus tegamur, his contenti simus.* Unde et in hoc significatur, quod debent esse *succincti lumbos mentis*. — In secundo instruuntur quantum ad id quod est *desiderandum* et quod est tenendum, et hoc est bonum supernum, ut, secundum illud Apostoli

<!-- page 609 -->
ad Philippenses tertio[^11], *nostra conversatio sit in caelis. Mente* enim debemus *excedere Deo* et *sobrii* esse proximo. — In tertio instruuntur, qualiter sit *perveniendum*. Figura enim orbicularis est *simplicissima, capacissima* et *pulcherrima*. In quo significatur, quod *simplices* debent esse in mente, Sapientiae primo[^12]: *In simplicitate cordis quaerite illum* etc.; *dilatati* in affectione, secundae ad Corinthios sexto: *Os nostrum patet ad vos, o Corinthii, cor nostrum dilatatum est;* et *pulcri* in conversatione, quia *confessio et pulcritudo in conspectu eius,* et hoc est per munditiam, secundum illud Psalmi: *Ambulans in via immaculata, hic mihi ministrabat.*

Et sic patet, quare sic debeant consignari per *tonsuram* et *coronam*. Nam *tonsura* dicitur amotio capillorum a parte inferiori; sed *corona* amotio capillorum orbicularis a parte superiori; vel posset dici etiam ipse *circulus*, et tunc corona utrumque comprehenderet[^13].

1. Ad illud ergo quod obiicitur, quod Dominus minabatur his qui huiusmodi tonsuras observabant; verum est, his qui faciebant ad cultum daemonum[^14], sed non his qui faciunt ad cultum divinum.

2. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod in Christo Iesu non valet circumcisio etc.; intelligendum est, quod per se non valet ad *iustificationem* capillorum amotio, verumtamen ad *eruditionem* valet[^15], valet etiam ad *distinctionem*.

3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod caesaries decorat naturam; dicendum, quod decor naturae duplex est: quidam *spiritualis* et quidam *corporalis*. *Spiritualis* decor per gratiam non aufertur, sed augetur; sed corporalis vanus est, secundum illud Proverbiorum ultimo[^16]: *Vana est pulcritudo;* et iste non est servandus, immo contemnendus ab his qui interiorem volunt servare, secundum illud Apostoli, secundae ad Corinthios quarto: *Etsi is qui foris est homo noster, corrumpatur* etc., et licet contemptibilis fiat extra, tamen decorus et honorabilis fit intra. Et in hoc significatur, quod huiusmodi cultura exterior est a spiritualibus fugienda.

4. 5. Ad illud quod obiicitur de Nazaraeis, quod totaliter radebantur etc.; dicendum, quod non oportet, veritatem umbrae per omnia assimilari, quoniam diversa diversis temporibus conveniunt. Illi enim primo servabant capillaturam et post radebant; in quo significabatur velamen legis Moysaicae et revelatio evangelicae; sed hic partim raditur, partim reservatur, ut signaculum regale maneat. Plus enim fit corona, ut sit signaculum distinctivum quam figurativum; e contrario erat in voto Nazaraeorum. — Et per hoc patet sequens. Nam sufficienter abdicatio terrenorum figuratur in tonsura — et ideo conversi laici tonsurantur, qui mundum reliquerunt[^17] — et apertio mentis significatur per summitatis rasuram; ideo non oportet, totam amoveri capillaturam. Praeterea, in ipsa significatione honestas debet attendi; et ideo non debent omnino capilli amoveri, pro eo quod indecens videretur habitus et forma clericalis.

6. Ad illud quod obiicitur de stultis, dicendum, quod non solum stulti coronantur, sed etiam reges; et ideo non est principaliter stultitiae signum; verumtamen et hoc non vacat a mysterio. Qui enim volunt vere Deo servire, oportet, quod stulti fiant huic mundo: quoniam enim in sapientia non cognovit mundus per sapientiam Deum, placuit Deo per stultitiam praedicationis salvos facere credentes[^18]. Unde primae ad Corinthios quarto: *Nos stulti propter Christum* etc.

Alia duo, quae quaeruntur, ex praedictis manifesta sunt, scilicet de tonsura conversorum et de coronatione clericorum: illi enim tondentur, quia temporalibus renuntiant; hi consignantur, quia ad spirituale[^19] et nobile officium assumuntur.

<!-- page 610 -->

english:
### Article I. *On the seal of order.*
### Question I. *Whether those to be ordained ought to be tonsured or crowned.*

As to the first, it is shown that clerics ought not to be *tonsured*.

1. In Jeremiah the forty-ninth[^1] the Lord threatens these: *I will scatter them into every wind, who are shorn in [their] hair:* if therefore the Lord detests this, it seems etc.

2. Likewise, to the Galatians the last[^2]: *In Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails anything nor uncircumcision, but a new creature:* therefore in the new law it avails nothing to shear the hair.

3. Likewise, the hair is given by nature for adornment[^3]; but all things of grace preserve those things which pertain to the adornment of nature: therefore in no Sacrament does it seem that the hair should be laid aside.

Likewise, it seems that they ought not to be *crowned*:

4. First, because the truth ought to correspond to the figure; but, as the Master[^4] says, this removal of the hair was prefigured in the vow of the Nazarites; but they did not make a crown, but shaved wholly, as is said in Numbers the sixth: therefore etc.

5. Likewise, the removal of the hair signifies the removal of superfluous things[^5]: if therefore not [only] the part of superfluity, but the whole is to be cast off; it seems that the whole head ought to be shaved.

6. Likewise, fools are wont to be marked with the seal of the crown[^6]; but nothing befits clerics except a sign of holiness and honorableness: therefore it seems that they ought in no way to be crowned.

It is asked, therefore, what is the reason why *clerics* are tonsured and crowned; and what is the difference between the crown and the tonsure; *and again, why converted religious* receive the tonsure but not the crown. — It is also asked why in the reception of this Sacrament the faithful are marked rather than in the reception of another Sacrament?

### Conclusion.
> **Conclusion.** That clerics be tonsured with a crown is fitting for distinction and instruction.

**I respond:** It must be said that, as will be seen better below[^7], in the Sacrament of order there is given a power for carrying out that noble office, and this is not given to all nor ought to be given to all; therefore it behooves that the persons receiving this office first be marked, and [marked] with this seal, which would show *distinction*, and which also would be for *instruction*. Now nothing is so fitting as the tonsure with the crown: first, by reason of *situation*, because in the most excellent part ought this seal to be placed, so that the office of nobility may be signified, for which[^8] they are prepared. But secondly, because the lower tonsure with the upper shaving make a circular figure in the head of hair; and it can be called a crown, which signifies that they are prepared for the royal priesthood, according to that [word] of the first [epistle] of Peter, the second [chapter][^9]: *You are a chosen race, a royal priesthood;* therefore the royal seal most rightly befits them for *distinguishing*.

It befits [them] nonetheless for *instructing*; and this, because in the conferral of such a seal there is the *removal* of superfluity, there is the *denuding* of the top of the head, there is the *impression* of a circular figure. — In the first, clerics are instructed what is to be *avoided*, namely the superfluity of earthliness, according to that [word] of the Apostle, first to Timothy the last[^10]: *Having food, and wherewith to be covered, with these let us be content.* Whence also in this it is signified that they ought to be *girded about the loins of the mind*. — In the second they are instructed as to that which is to be *desired* and which is to be held, and this is the supernal good, so that, according to that [word] of the Apostle

<!-- page 609 -->
to the Philippians the third[^11], *our conversation may be in heaven. In mind* indeed we ought to *go beyond unto God* and to be *sober* toward the neighbor. — In the third they are instructed how it is to be *attained*. For the circular figure is the *simplest, most capacious,* and *most beautiful*. In which is signified that they ought to be *simple* in mind, Wisdom the first[^12]: *In simplicity of heart seek him* etc.; *enlarged* in affection, second to the Corinthians the sixth: *Our mouth is open to you, O Corinthians, our heart is enlarged;* and *beautiful* in conversation, because *confession and beauty are in his sight,* and this is through cleanness, according to that [word] of the Psalm: *He that walked in the immaculate way, he ministered to me.*

And thus it is clear why they ought to be marked in this way by the *tonsure* and the *crown*. For *tonsure* is called the removal of hair from the lower part; but *crown* the circular removal of hair from the upper part; or it could also be called the *circle* itself, and then the crown would comprehend both[^13].

1. To that, therefore, which is objected, that the Lord threatened those who observed tonsures of this kind; it is true of those who did [it] for the worship of demons[^14], but not of those who do [it] for the divine worship.

2. To that which is objected, that in Christ Jesus circumcision does not avail etc.; it must be understood that of itself the removal of hair does not avail for *justification*, nevertheless it avails for *instruction*[^15], it avails also for *distinction*.

3. To that which is objected, that the hair adorns nature; it must be said that the adornment of nature is twofold: one *spiritual* and one *corporal*. The *spiritual* adornment is not taken away by grace, but increased; but the corporal is vain, according to that [word] of Proverbs the last[^16]: *Beauty is vain;* and this is not to be preserved, rather to be despised by those who wish to preserve the interior [adornment], according to that [word] of the Apostle, second to the Corinthians the fourth: *Though our outward man be corrupted* etc., and although he becomes contemptible without, yet he becomes comely and honorable within. And in this is signified that such exterior cultivation is to be fled by spiritual [persons].

4. 5. To that which is objected concerning the Nazarites, that they were wholly shaved etc.; it must be said that it is not necessary that the truth be likened to the shadow in all things, since diverse things befit diverse times. For they first kept the head of hair and afterward shaved; in which was signified the veil of the Mosaic law and the revelation of the evangelical [law]; but here it is partly shaved, partly reserved, so that the royal seal may remain. For the crown is made more that it may be a distinctive seal rather than a figurative one; on the contrary [it was] in the vow of the Nazarites. — And by this the following is clear. For the abdication of earthly things is sufficiently figured in the tonsure — and therefore converted laymen are tonsured, who have left the world[^17] — and the opening of the mind is signified by the shaving of the top; therefore it is not necessary that the whole head of hair be removed. Moreover, in the signification itself honorableness ought to be attended to; and therefore the hairs ought not to be wholly removed, for the reason that the habit and form of clerics would seem unbecoming.

6. To that which is objected concerning fools, it must be said that not only fools are crowned, but also kings; and therefore it is not principally a sign of folly; nevertheless this too is not devoid of mystery. For those who wish truly to serve God, it behooves that they become fools to this world: for since in wisdom the world by wisdom did not know God, it pleased God by the folly of preaching to save those who believe[^18]. Whence first to the Corinthians the fourth: *We [are] fools for Christ's sake* etc.

The other two [things] which are asked are manifest from the aforesaid, namely concerning the tonsure of the converted and the coronation of clerics: for the former are tonsured, because they renounce temporal things; the latter are marked, because they are assumed to a spiritual[^19] and noble office.

<!-- page 610 -->

la: Vers. 32.

la: Vers. 15.

la: Isidor., XI. Etymolog. c. 1. n. 28: *Capilli* vocati, quasi *capitis pili*, facti, ut et decorem praestent etc. August., Enarrat. in Ps. 51. n. 9, dicit, quod « capilli non superflue facti sunt a Deo in corpore hominum, sed ad aliquod ornamentum ».

en: Isidore, XI *Etymologies* c. 1, n. 28: *Capilli* (hairs), so called as it were *capitis pili* (the hairs of the head), made that they may also afford adornment, etc. Augustine, *Commentary on Ps.* 51, n. 9, says that "the hairs were not made superfluously by God on the body of men, but for some ornament."

la: Hic c. 4, ubi etiam modum radendi ex Num. 6, 18. proponit. Cfr. Act. 21, 24.

en: Here c. 4, where he also sets forth the manner of shaving from Num. 6, 18. Cf. Acts 21, 24.

la: August., Enarrat. in Ps. 51. n. 9: Nam isti capilli superflua rerum temporalium significant. Cfr. Enarrat. in Ps. 140. n. 8.

en: Augustine, *Commentary on Ps.* 51, n. 9: For these hairs signify the superfluities of temporal things. Cf. *Commentary on Ps.* 140, n. 8.

la: Teste Aristophane, tonsura capillorum signum erat servitutis. Dicit enim in *Avib.*: Δοῦλος ὢν, κόμην ἔχεις i. e. servus cum sis, comam habes sive nutris? Secundum Gregor. Turon., III. Histor. Francor. c. 18, Chrotechildis regina aiebat: Satius enim mihi est, si ad regnum non eriguntur [filii], mortuos eos videre quam tonsos.

en: On the testimony of Aristophanes, the tonsure of the hair was a sign of servitude. For he says in *Birds*: Δοῦλος ὢν, κόμην ἔχεις, i.e. "being a slave, do you have long hair or wear it?" According to Gregory of Tours, III *History of the Franks* c. 18, queen Chrotechildis said: "It is better for me, if [my sons] are not raised to the kingdom, to see them dead than tonsured."

la: Art. 2. q. 2. — Inferius post *exsequendum* [cod. G *exercendum*] Vat. prosequitur *et quoniam haec* etc. Subinde pro *hoc officium* multi codd. perperam *hoc signaculum*.

en: Art. 2, q. 2. — Below, after *exsequendum* [cod. G *exercendum*] the Vatican [edition] continues *et quoniam haec* etc. Then, for *hoc officium*, many codices wrongly [read] *hoc signaculum*.

la: Codd. I K *significetur nobilitas, ad quam*.

en: Codices I K [read] *significetur nobilitas, ad quam.*

la: Ver. 9: *Vos autem genus* etc. Cfr. hic lit. Magistri, c. 4.

en: Verse 9: *But you [are] a race* etc. Cf. here the text of the Master, c. 4.

la: Vers. 8: *Habentes autem alimenta... his contenti simus* [ita etiam codd. F Z]. — Seq. locus est I. Petr. 1, 13. Cfr. Eph. 6, 14.

en: Verse 8: *But having food... with these let us be content* [so also codices F Z]. — The following passage is I Pet. 1, 13. Cf. Eph. 6, 14.

la: Vers. 20: *Nostra autem conversatio in caelis est.* — Subinde respicitur II. Cor. 5, 13: *Sive enim mente excedimus, Deo, sive sobrii sumus, vobis.* — Pro *excedere* edd. *accedere*.

en: Verse 20: *But our conversation is in heaven.* — Thereupon II Cor. 5, 13 is regarded: *For whether we be beside ourselves, it is to God; or whether we be sober, it is for you.* — For *excedere* the editions [read] *accedere.*

la: Vers. 1. — Seq. locus est II. Cor. 6, 11; tertius Ps. 95, 6; quartus Ps. 100, 6. — De praestantia *circuli* vide Aristot., I. de Caelo et mundo, text. 12. (c. 2.); II. text. 22. seqq. (c. 4.); V. Metaph. text. 11. (IV. c. 6.); et August., de Quantit. animae, c. 11. n. 17. seqq. Honorius Augustod., I. Gemmae animae, c. 195: Rotunditas autem, quae remanet crinium, est ornatus virtutum; capilli vero in circulum coaequantur, quia omnes virtutes in concordia caritatis consummantur etc.

en: Verse 1. — The following passage is II Cor. 6, 11; the third Ps. 95, 6; the fourth Ps. 100, 6. — On the excellence of the *circle* see Aristotle, I *On the Heaven and the World*, text 12 (c. 2); II text 22 seqq. (c. 4); V *Metaphysics* text 11 (IV c. 6); and Augustine, *On the Quantity of the Soul*, c. 11, n. 17 seqq. Honorius of Autun, I *Gemma animae*, c. 195: "But the roundness which remains of the hair is the ornament of the virtues; and the hairs are equalized into a circle, because all the virtues are consummated in the concord of charity," etc.

la: Vide hic lit. Magistri, c. 4, et Isidor., II. de Offic. eccles. c. 4. n. 4. — Post *vel* Vat. cum pluribus codd. addit *corona*.

en: See here the text of the Master, c. 4, and Isidore, II *On the Offices of the Church* c. 4, n. 4. — After *vel* the Vatican [edition], with several codices, adds *corona.*

la: Sic idololatrae sacerdotes, qui erant Isidis sacris devoti, caput radebant (cfr. Hieron., XIII. in Ezech. 44, 17, et Ambros., Epist. 58. n. 3.); cuius sacerdotium aucupatus, Commodus Caesar caput rasit, ut refert Spartianus.

en: Thus the idolatrous priests, who were devoted to the rites of Isis, shaved the head (cf. Jerome, XIII *On Ezekiel* 44, 17, and Ambrose, *Letter* 58, n. 3); coveting whose priesthood, Commodus Caesar shaved his head, as Spartianus reports.

la: Plures codd. *valet tamen ad eruditionem*.

en: Several codices [read] *valet tamen ad eruditionem* (it avails nevertheless for instruction).

la: Vers. 30. — Seq. textus est II. Cor. 4, 16: *Sed licet is* etc.

en: Verse 30. — The following text is II Cor. 4, 16: *Sed licet is* (But although the [outer man]) etc.

la: Cfr. Dionys., de Eccles. Hierarch. c. 6. p. II; August., de Opere monachor. c. 31. n. 39. seq. — Mox post *summitatis* in cod. X secunda manus addidit *capitis* (cfr. hic lit. Magistri, c. 4.).

en: Cf. Dionysius, *On the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy* c. 6, p. II; Augustine, *On the Work of Monks* c. 31, n. 39 seq. — Shortly after, following *summitatis*, in codex X a second hand added *capitis* (cf. here the text of the Master, c. 4).

la: Epist. I. Cor. 1, 21: *Nam quia in Dei sapientia* etc. — Seq. locus est ibid. 4, 10. — Gregor. Turon., I. de Gloria Martyr. c. 28: Petrus Apostolus (an. 66, 29 Iun.) ob humilitatem docendam caput desuper tonderi instituit etc. Beda, V. Histor. Gentis Anglor. c. 22: Neque vere ob id tantum in coronam attondimur, quia Petrus ita attonsus est, sed quia Petrus in memoriam dominicae passionis ita attonsus est, idcirco et nos, qui per eandem passionem salvari desideramus, ipsius passionis signum cum illo in vertice, summa videlicet corporis nostri parte, gestamus etc.

en: Epistle I Cor. 1, 21: *For seeing that in the wisdom of God* etc. — The following passage is ibid. 4, 10. — Gregory of Tours, I *On the Glory of the Martyrs* c. 28: The Apostle Peter (in the year 66, 29 June) instituted that the head be shaved on top for the teaching of humility, etc. Bede, V *History of the English People* c. 22: "Nor indeed are we shaved into a crown only for this, because Peter was so tonsured, but because Peter was so tonsured in memory of the Lord's passion; therefore we too, who desire to be saved through the same passion, bear the sign of his passion together with him on the crown of the head, namely the highest part of our body," etc.

la: Cod. L (E a secunda manu) *speciale*, alii codd. et ed. 1 *facile*.

en: Codex L (E by a second hand) [reads] *speciale*; the other codices and the 1st edition [read] *facile.* ---

latin_scholion:
**1.** Secundum vim nominis ordo est « rerum parium dispariumque unicuique sua loca tribuens congrua dispositio » (August., XIX. de Civ. Dei, c. 13.), sive aliis verbis, « dispositio superiorum et inferiorum rerum, quae inter se ita aptae sunt, ut una ad alteram referatur. Cum itaque in hoc ministerio multi sint *gradus* et variae *functiones*, omnia vero certa ratione distributa sint et collocata; recte et commode *ordinis* nomen ei impositum videtur » (Catech. Rom., de Sacram. ord. n. 9.). Notandum etiam, quod *ordo* saepe sumitur pro *ordinatione*, quae proprie est *causa transiens*, ille vero *effectus permanens*, haec *actio et Sacramentum*, ille *status* et potestas, non Sacramentum (cfr. infra a. 2. q. 2.). — Ad quatuor huius articuli qq. alii antiqui eodem sensu, sed brevius respondent.

**I.** In 1. quaestione S. Doctor pro more suo sagaciter et copiose explicat sensus mysticos horum rituum externorum.

De 1. et 2. quaestione: Scot., in utroque Scripto hic q. unica in fine. — S. Thom., hic q. 3. a. 1. quaestiunc. 1. 2. — B. Albert., hic a. 13. 14. — Petr. a Tar., hic q. 1. a. 1. 2. — Richard. a Med., hic a. 1. q. 1. 2. — Durand., hic q. 4. — Dionys. Carth., de hac et seq. q. hic q. 2.

**III.** De 3. quaestione: S. Thom., loc. cit. quaestiunc. 3. — B. Albert., a. 15. — Petr. a Tar., de hac et seq. q. loc. cit. a. 3. quaestiunc. 1. 2. — Richard. a Med., loc. cit. q. 3.

Quartam quaestionem alii, excepto Petro a Tar., locis citt. tantum tangunt in solutionibus obiectorum, alii eam prorsus omittunt.

---

english_scholion:
**1.** According to the force of the name, order is "a disposition apportioning to each of things equal and unequal their fitting places" (Augustine, XIX *On the City of God*, c. 13), or in other words, "a disposition of higher and lower things, which are so fitted to one another that the one is referred to the other. Since therefore in this ministry there are many *grades* and various *functions*, but all are distributed and arranged by a certain plan, rightly and fittingly does the name of *order* seem imposed on it" (Roman Catechism, on the Sacrament of order, n. 9). It is also to be noted that *order* is often taken for *ordination*, which properly is a *transient cause*, but the former [is] a *permanent effect*; the latter *action and Sacrament*, the former *status* and power, not Sacrament (cf. below, a. 2, q. 2). — To the four questions of this article the other ancients respond in the same sense, but more briefly.

**I.** In the 1st question the Holy Doctor, according to his custom, sagaciously and copiously explains the mystical senses of these external rites.

On the 1st and 2nd question: Scotus, in each Writing here q. single at the end. — St. Thomas, here q. 3, a. 1, subquestion 1, 2. — B. Albert, here a. 13, 14. — Peter of Tarentaise, here q. 1, a. 1, 2. — Richard of Middleton, here a. 1, q. 1, 2. — Durandus, here q. 4. — Dionysius the Carthusian, on this and the following q. here q. 2.

**III.** On the 3rd question: St. Thomas, loc. cit. subquestion 3. — B. Albert, a. 15. — Peter of Tarentaise, on this and the following q. loc. cit. a. 3, subquestion 1, 2. — Richard of Middleton, loc. cit. q. 3.

The fourth question the others, except Peter of Tarentaise, in the cited places only touch upon in the solutions of the objections; others omit it entirely.

---

translators_notes:
- **Provenance.** Latin re-set from the IA djvu OCR (`bonaventure_vol4_raw.txt`, raw L66292–66486) and corrected against the 450 dpi PDF column bands for printed pp. 608–610 (`/tmp/colcrop/vol4-p608..610-{L,R}-{0,1,2}.png`; left columns regenerated at split 2120, right columns/footers at split 1780, since vol4's default 1660/1880 split truncated the left column mid-line). Two-column IA OCR was cascade-shattered in the Respondeo and footers, so the PDF bands are authoritative there (Vol II/IV override). Running heads verified: `ARTICULUS I. / QUAESTIO I.` open at the top of p. 608; `DIST. XXIV. P. I. ART. I. QUAEST. I.` runs on p. 609; `SCHOLION.` and `QUAESTIO II.` are on p. 610.
- **Page correction.** Skeleton frontmatter had `printed_pages: [607, 608, 609]` / `pdf_pages: [627, 628, 629]`; page-verified against the bands and corrected to **608–610 / 628–630** (offset pdf = printed + 20). The quaestio opens at the top of p. 608 (ARTICULUS I is the first thing on that page); the body ends on p. 609 ("…ad spirituale et nobile officium assumuntur"); the scholion is on p. 610. The prior distinction's material occupies p. 607.
- **Article opener folded in.** Per the locked convention, the short ARTICULUS I opener (`De ordinis signaculo`) is folded into this q1 rather than a standalone divisio chunk.
- **Apparatus split (19 footnotes; per-page restart).** p. 608 footer = notes 1–10 (this chunk's markers `[^1]`–`[^10]`): n1 Ieremiae⁴⁹, n2 Galatas, n3 caesaries/decorem, n4 Magister, n5 superfluorum, n6 stulti/Aristophanes, n7 infra/exsequendum, n8 ad quod, n9 Petri, n10 Timotheum. p. 609 footer = notes 1–9 (this chunk's markers `[^11]`–`[^19]`): n1 Philippenses→[^11], n2 Sapientiae/circulus→[^12], n3 Magistri/Isidor→[^13], n4 idololatrae→[^14], n5 valet tamen→[^15], n6 Vers.30/II Cor 4,16→[^16], n7 Dionys./summitatis→[^17], n8 I Cor 1,21/Gregor./Beda→[^18], n9 Cod. L speciale→[^19]. Both page footers are fully contained within this quaestio; no shared-page footer split with a neighboring chunk. (The "S. Bonav. — Tom. IV." line and the gathering mark "77" at the foot of p. 609 are printer's signatures, not footnotes.)
- **★ Scholion disposition (this chunk owns it).** The scholion header is printed **`SCHOLION.`** (OCR garbled it as `SCHOLIOK`). It is an **article-level** scholion: its numbered note **1.** treats the meaning of *ordo*, and it states "Ad quatuor huius articuli qq. alii antiqui… respondent" ("to the four questions of this article the other ancients respond"). Its loci-paralleli block covers **all four** questions of Article I — **I.** (q. 1), the paragraph "De 1. et 2. quaestione" (qq. 1–2), **III.** (q. 3), and a closing sentence on the fourth question. Therefore Article I's sibling questions (q. 2, q. 3, q. 4) render **no** scholion of their own; `has_scholion: true` here.
- **`[?]` flags / minor readings (no inline flag warranted).** (a) The loci-paralleli in the scholion right column are printed **I. … [unlabeled] … III.** — the Quaracchi text carries **no "II." numeral** on the "De 1. et 2. quaestione" paragraph (which is the de-facto second point, treating qq. 1–2). Rendered faithfully as printed, without supplying a "II." Reading is certain from the p. 610-R band; no inline `[?]`. (b) Note 8 (`[^8]`) codd. sigla read "I K" on the band ("Codd. I K"); adopted. No inline `[?]` flags placed anywhere in this chunk.


site: bonaventure

collection: Book IV: On the Sacraments

title: Dist. 24, Part 1, Art. 1, Q. 2

title_alt:
Utrum corona sit Sacramentum
Whether the corona is a sacrament

author: St. Bonaventure

languages: en la

title: Opera Omnia (Quaracchi critical edition)

publisher: Collegii S. Bonaventurae

source_text:
<!-- page 610 -->

### Quaestio II. *Utrum corona sit Sacramentum.*

Secundo quaeritur, utrum corona sit Sacramentum. Et quod sic, videtur:

1. Quia «corona est signaculum», sicut dicitur in littera[^1]; et est signum rei sacrae, scilicet elevationis mentis ad caelestia: ergo videtur, quod corona sit Sacramentum.

2. Item, in spiritualibus corporalia non fiunt propter corporalia, sed propter spiritualia: ergo talis consignatio in capillis fit propter spiritualem significationem; sed signum exterius, cui respondet interius, est Sacramentum[^2]: ergo etc.

3. Item, corona non datur a quolibet, sed ab episcopo, vel personis, quae habent dignitatem specialem[^3]: ergo importat aliquam excellentiam; sed non quantum ad id quod est exterius, quia barbarus potest eam facere: ergo quantum ad id quod est interius: ergo etc.

4. Item, ex corona efficitur aliquis et dicitur clericus; sed clericus et laicus distinguuntur: ergo omnes fideles aut habent Sacramentum ordinis, aut laici dicuntur; videtur, quod coronati recipiunt in tonsuratione[^4] vel coronatione Sacramentum ordinis.

**Contra:**
1. Non distinguuntur nisi septem gradus, sicut assignantur in littera[^5]; sed corona antecedit omnes illos gradus: ergo non ponit in aliquo gradu ordinis, ergo non est Sacramentum ordinis nec aliud, constat: ergo etc.

2. Item, in omni ordine traditur aliqua potestas; sed in corona nulla omnino traditur: ergo corona non est ordo. *Prima* patet per definitionem ordinis[^6]; *secunda* manifestatur in collatione coronae, ubi non fit mentio de aliqua potestate.

3. Item, in ordinibus datur nobile Sacramentum, ac per hoc debent cum magna solemnitate dari, unde non dantur nisi in Missa; sed corona datur extra Missam[^7]: ergo etc.

### Conclusio.

> Corona clericorum nec est Sacramentum nec ordo, sed tantum dispositio quaedam ad utrumque.

**Respondeo:** Dicendum, quod sicut in transeuntibus de uno statu ad alium praemittitur aliquid praeparatorium, quod non *ponit* in statu, sed *disponit*; sic in proposito intelligendum est. Nam suscipientes ordinis Sacramentum in quodam speciali statu inter fideles collocantur. Unde quemadmodum inter statum saecularem et religiosum medius est novitiatus, in quo nec saecularis nec religiosus est proprie, cum non voverit ea quae sunt religionis servare; et sicut inter fideles et infideles medii sunt catechumeni, qui tamen non sunt inter fideles computandi, immo hora communionis de ecclesia consueverunt emitti, sicut novitii de capitulis: sic clerici medii sunt, in quantum habent tonsuram, inter laicos et ordinatos. Quia tamen signum istud omnibus tonsuratis, sive sint ordinati, sive non[^8], est <!-- page 611 -->commune; ideo omnes clerici nuncupantur, et confunditur nomen. Sicut ergo novitiatus non est religio, sed ad religionem disponit; et catechumenatus sive catechizatio non est baptismus, sed dispositio et praeparatio: sic commune signaculum non est Sacramentum nec ordo, sed tantum dispositio.

1. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod est sacrae rei signum; dicendum, quod ista non est *tota ratio* Sacramenti, sed amplius oportet addere. Non enim sufficit *signatio*, nisi etiam aliquid ibi conferatur; quod cum non fiat in corona, quia nulla traditur spiritualis potestas, patet, quod non est ordo.

2. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod non fit nisi propter spirituale; dicendum, quod verum est, quod corona fit propter spirituale, non tamen propter spirituale *officium*, quod *ibi detur*, sed quod *figuratur*, et ad quod homo configuratur et praeparatur[^9]; et ideo non frustra fit.

3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod datur a persona excellenti; dicendum, quod eiusdem est praeparare materiam et formam adducere; et quoniam praeparat ad ordinis Sacramentum, qui ponit hominem in *statu* excellentiae, et qui etiam[^10] traditur a personis excellentibus; ideo et corona, non ratione sui, sed ratione eius ad quod disponit.

4. Ultimum quod obiicit, iam determinatum est, quia nec *laicus* est proprie nec *ordinatus*; sed tamen magis se tenet cum ordinato: sicut novitius plus appropinquat ad statum religionis et sicut dicitur *religiosus*, quamvis non *professus* dicatur; sic habens coronam dicitur *clericus*, cum tamen non sit *ordinatus*[^11]. Et sic patet totum.

---

english:
### Question II. *Whether the corona is a sacrament.*

In the second place inquiry is made whether the corona [the clerical crown] is a sacrament. And that it is, seems [to be so]:

1. Because "the corona is a seal," as is said in the text[^1]; and it is the sign of a sacred thing, namely of the elevation of the mind to heavenly things: therefore it seems that the corona is a sacrament.

2. Likewise, in spiritual matters bodily things are not done for the sake of bodily things, but for the sake of spiritual things: therefore such a marking upon the hair is done for the sake of a spiritual signification; but an outward sign, to which an inward [reality] corresponds, is a sacrament[^2]: therefore etc.

3. Likewise, the corona is not conferred by just anyone, but by a bishop, or by persons who have a special dignity[^3]: therefore it implies some excellence; but not as to that which is outward, since a barbarian can make it: therefore as to that which is inward: therefore etc.

4. Likewise, from the corona someone is made and is called a cleric; but cleric and layman are distinguished: therefore all the faithful either have the sacrament of order, or are called laymen; it seems that those crowned receive, in the tonsuring[^4] or crowning, the sacrament of order.

**On the contrary:**
1. There are distinguished only seven grades, as they are assigned in the text[^5]; but the corona precedes all those grades: therefore it does not place [one] in any grade of order, therefore it is not the sacrament of order, nor anything else, this is established: therefore etc.

2. Likewise, in every order some power is handed on; but in the corona none whatever is handed on: therefore the corona is not an order. The *first* [point] is clear through the definition of order[^6]; the *second* is shown in the conferral of the corona, where no mention is made of any power.

3. Likewise, in the orders a noble sacrament is given, and on this account they ought to be given with great solemnity, whence they are not given except in the Mass; but the corona is given outside the Mass[^7]: therefore etc.

### Conclusion.

> The corona of clerics is neither a sacrament nor an order, but only a certain disposition toward both.

**I respond:** It must be said that, just as in those passing over from one state to another something preparatory is sent ahead, which does not *place* [one] in the state but *disposes* [him]; so it must be understood in the matter at hand. For those receiving the sacrament of order are placed in a certain special state among the faithful. Whence, just as between the secular and the religious state the novitiate is a middle [state], in which one is neither properly secular nor religious, since he has not vowed to keep the things that are of religion; and just as between the faithful and the unbelievers the catechumens are a middle [group], who nevertheless are not to be counted among the faithful, but rather at the hour of communion were customarily sent out of the church, as novices from the chapters: so clerics are a middle [group], inasmuch as they have the tonsure, between laymen and the ordained. Yet because this sign, to all the tonsured, whether they be ordained or not[^8], is <!-- page 611 -->common; therefore all are called clerics, and the name is confounded. Just as therefore the novitiate is not religion, but disposes toward religion; and the catechumenate or catechizing is not baptism, but a disposition and preparation: so the common seal is not a sacrament nor an order, but only a disposition.

1. To that which is objected, that it is the sign of a sacred thing; it must be said that this is not the *whole account* of a sacrament, but it is necessary to add more. For a *signing* does not suffice, unless something also be conferred therein; and since this does not happen in the corona, because no spiritual power is handed on, it is clear that it is not an order.

2. To that which is objected, that it is done only for the sake of the spiritual; it must be said that it is true that the corona is done for the sake of the spiritual, yet not for the sake of a spiritual *office* which *is given there*, but [for the sake of that] which *is figured*, and to which a man is configured and prepared[^9]; and therefore it is not done in vain.

3. To that which is objected, that it is conferred by an excellent person; it must be said that it belongs to the same [agent] to prepare the matter and to bring in the form; and since it prepares for the sacrament of order, which places a man in a *state* of excellence, and which also[^10] is handed on by excellent persons; therefore the corona too [is conferred by an excellent person], not by reason of itself, but by reason of that toward which it disposes.

4. The last [objection] which he makes has already been determined, since [the cleric] is neither properly a *layman* nor *ordained*; but nevertheless he holds more with the ordained: just as a novice more nearly approaches the state of religion, and just as he is called *religious*, although he is said not to be *professed*; so one having the corona is called a *cleric*, although he is nevertheless not *ordained*[^11]. And thus the whole is clear.

---

la: Hic c. 4. — Supra lit. Magistri, d. I. c. 2: *Sacramentum est sacrae rei signum.*

en: Here, c. 4. — Above, in the text of the Master, d. 1, c. 2: *A sacrament is the sign of a sacred thing.*

la: Vide supra lit. Magistri, d. I. c. 4.

en: See above, in the text of the Master, d. 1, c. 4.

la: Cod. H et ed. I *spiritualem.* Mox pro *importat* cod. A *spectat ad.*

en: Codex H and edition I [read] *spiritualem* [spiritual]. Presently, for *importat* [implies], codex A [reads] *spectat ad* [pertains to].

la: Cod. O *tonsione*, edd. *susceptione*, cui cod. L (E a secunda manu) addit *coronae*, nonnulli codd. omittunt *in tonsuratione vel coronatione.*

en: Codex O [reads] *tonsione* [tonsuring], the editions *susceptione* [reception], to which codex L (E by a second hand) adds *coronae* [of the corona]; several codices omit *in tonsuratione vel coronatione* [in the tonsuring or crowning].

la: Hic c. 3. — Inferius pro *ponit* edd. *ponitur.*

en: Here, c. 3. — Below, for *ponit* [it places] the editions [read] *ponitur* [it is placed].

la: Hic in lit. Magistri, c. 13. positam.

en: [The definition] set down here in the text of the Master, c. 13.

la: Pontificale Roman. dicit: *Clericatus seu prima tonsura quocumque die, hora et loco conferri potest.*

en: The Roman Pontifical says: *The clerical state, or first tonsure, can be conferred on any day, hour, and place.*

la: Fide codd. A F G H I K O X aa supplevimus *tonsuratis, sive sint ordinati, sive non.* In fine corp. pro *commune signaculum* codd. L U *coronae signaculum.*

en: On the authority of codices A F G H I K O X aa we have supplied *tonsuratis, sive sint ordinati, sive non* [to the tonsured, whether they be ordained or not]. At the end of the body [of the article], for *commune signaculum* [common seal] codices L U [read] *coronae signaculum* [seal of the corona].

la: Edd. legunt: *quod ibi figuretur, et ad hoc, quod homo configuretur et praeparetur.*

en: The editions read: *that it be figured therein, and unto this, that a man be configured and prepared.*

la: Pro *etiam* cod. I (P a secunda manu) *ordo sive status.* In fine solut. post *disponit* [Vat. *disponitur*] cod. aa supplet *traditur ab excellenti persona.*

en: For *etiam* [also], codex I (P by a second hand) [reads] *ordo sive status* [order or state]. At the end of the solution, after *disponit* [it disposes] ([the] Vatican [edition]: *disponitur* [it is disposed]), codex aa supplies *traditur ab excellenti persona* [it is handed on by an excellent person].

la: Hinc novitii et clerici gaudent privilegiis respectivis. — Vide scholion ad praecedentem quaest.

en: Hence novices and clerics enjoy their respective privileges. — See the scholion to the preceding question.

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** Latin re-set column-by-column from the 450 dpi PDF column bands for printed pp.610–611 (PDF pp.630–631; Vol IV offset `pdf = printed + 20`) under the VOL II OVERRIDE, with the IA djvu OCR (`raw/bonaventure_vol4_raw.txt`, lines 66487–66620) as the base for clean *videtur/Contra* prose and footnote-marker spacing. This chunk is **Distinction XXIV, Part I, Articulus I, Quaestio II** — *Utrum corona sit Sacramentum*. The two-column IA OCR is cascade-shattered through the Respondeo, the *Ad obiecta*, and every footer, so the PDF column-band read is authoritative for those regions; the OCR supplied marker spacing only. Bands were regenerated at split_x=1780 (the CLAUDE.md default 1880 clipped the right column mid-word).

**Title corrected from skeleton.** The auto-chunked skeleton frontmatter carried a placeholder `title_la` ("Utrum, dato quod sic, coronari debeant in modum coronae"). Eyes-on the p.610 band, the QUAESTIO II header + centered italic title read **"Utrum corona sit Sacramentum"** (opener: *Secundo quaeritur, utrum corona sit Sacramentum. Et quod sic, videtur*). Corrected `title_la`/`title_en` accordingly. No q-swap in the argument sequence (Contra 1–3, replies 1–4 all align).

**Page span corrected: 610–611, not 609–610.** The skeleton frontmatter said pp.609–610. Verified against the running heads: **p.609** (running head "…QUAEST. I. — 609") is entirely q1, ending with *Ad quaestiones incid. … et nobile officium assumuntur.* **p.610** opens (both columns, top) with q1's article-level **SCHOLION**, below which "QUAESTIO II. / Utrum corona sit Sacramentum" begins at the foot of the L-column and runs into the R-column (args, Contra, Conclusio, Respondeo). **p.611** (running head "…QUAEST. III. — 611") carries the Respondeo tail + replies 1–4, ending at *Et sic patet totum*, after which QUAESTIO III opens. So q2 = printed **610–611**, PDF **630–631**.

**Page-split map (running heads verified eyes-on):**
- **p.610**: q2 opener + *Fundamenta* args 1–4, Contra args 1–3, CONCLUSIO, and the Respondeo down through *sive sint ordinati, sive non[^8], est* (last word on the page). Footer note-series **1–8** → [^1]–[^8]. **The article scholion sits above the q2 opener on this page but carries no numbered footnote markers, so all 8 of p.610's footer notes belong to q2.** The page break falls between *…sive non[^8], est* (p.610) and *commune…* (p.611).
- **p.611**: Respondeo tail (*commune; ideo omnes clerici nuncupantur…*) + replies 1–4, ending the body at *Et sic patet totum*. q2 claims footer note-series **1–3** → [^9]–[^11] only. **p.611 footer notes 4+ (Psalm. 15,5; Hieron. Epist. 52; Hugo *de Sacram.*; etc.) belong to QUAESTIO III**, which opens lower on the same page — not claimed here.

**Apparatus count = 11** (p.610: 8; p.611: 3), all keyed to body markers in both languages. This is within the normal 8–15 band for a full quaestio. The two restart-series are merged into one consecutive [^N] run.

**Scholion: ABSENT.** q2 has no scholion of its own. The article's single SCHOLION is printed at the top of p.610 (above the q2 header) and belongs to q1 (`bon-sent-IV-d24-p1-a1-q1`); its sections survey qq. 1–3 and note the fourth question. This is independently confirmed by q2's own last footer note, [^11] = *"Vide scholion ad praecedentem quaest."* ("See the scholion to the preceding question"). `has_scholion: false`. No scholion text falls inside the raw range 66487–66620, so nothing was dropped.

**Hand-offs.** Picked up from `bon-sent-IV-d24-p1-a1-q1`: q1 owns p.609 in full plus the p.610-top article scholion and any p.610 scholion-block footers; q2 begins at the foot of p.610's L-column. Forwarded to `bon-sent-IV-d24-p1-a1-q3`: q2's body ends cleanly on p.611 at *Et sic patet totum* (no mid-page splice into q3); QUAESTIO III (*Utrum in susceptione coronae fiat abrenuntiatio temporalium*) opens lower on p.611 and carries p.611's footer notes 4+.

**[?] flags:** none. Codex sigla (A, F, G, H, I, K, O, X, U, L, aa; P a secunda manu), edition/variant readings, and citations (Pontificale Romanum; the Master's *littera*, d.1 cc.2/4 and d.24 cc.3/4/13) resolved cleanly against the PDF bands. The p.611 running head OCR rendered QUAEST. II's page as the correct "QUAEST. III. — 611" (the head names q3, which shares the page); page identity confirmed by the +20 offset and the printed "611" digits.

method: LLM-assisted translation from the Quaracchi Latin, verified chunk-by-chunk against the printed plates (apparatus roster, cross-references, page/gutter boundaries).

license_source: Public Domain Mark 1.0

license_translation: CC BY-NC 4.0

license_apparatus: CC BY-NC 4.0


title: Dist. 24, Part 1, Art. 1, Q. 3

source_text:
<!-- page 611 -->

### Quaestio III. *Utrum in susceptione coronae fiat abrenuntiatio temporalium.*

Tertio quaeritur, utrum in susceptione coronae fiat abrenuntiatio temporalium. Et quod sic, videtur:

1. Primo per illud quod dicunt in susceptione coronae: *Dominus pars hereditatis meae et calicis mei; tu es, qui restitues hereditatem meam mihi*[^1]; sed non *restituitur*, nisi quod *datur* et *dimittitur*: si ergo clericus petit *restitutionem* hereditatis, implicat eius *dimissionem*.

2. Item, super hoc dicit Hieronymus[^2]: «Dominus cum his partibus, scilicet transitoriis, pars fieri dedignatur»: restat ergo, quod *Deum* in partem suam non habeant, aut *hereditate alia* careant.

3. Item, Hugo de sancto Victore in libro de Sacramentis[^3]: «Aliam terram non debet clericus habere nisi Deum et ea quae ad Deum spectant; cui statutum est de decimis et oblationibus, quae Deo offeruntur, sustentari».

4. Item, ad maiorem perfectionem tenentur clerici novi quam veteris testamenti — unde Matthaei quinto[^4]: *Nisi abundaverit iustitia vestra* etc. — sed sacerdotibus et levitis dicitur Deuteronomii decimo octavo: *Non habebunt sacerdotes et levitae, et omnes qui de eadem stirpe sunt, partem et hereditatem cum reliquo populo Israel*: ergo si illi ad hoc tenebantur, multo fortius videtur de clericis novi testamenti.

5. Item, tonsura significat temporalium abdicationem, et corona elevationem ad caelestia, sicut dicit Magister in littera[^5]: ergo vel est falsum signum, vel clericus non debet habere patrimonium sive aliquam possessionem temporalium.

**Contra:**
1. Ieremias fuit de ordine sacerdotali, sicut patet in principio[^6]: *Verba Ieremiae* etc., et tamen dicitur Ieremiae trigesimo secundo: *Dixit Hanameel Ieremiae: Posside agrum meum, qui est in Anathoth, quia tibi competit hereditas*: ergo competebat illis hereditas. Si ergo veritas respondet figurae, videtur etc.

2. Item, Levitici vigesimo quinto[^7]: *Aedes levitarum, quae in urbibus sunt, semper possunt redimi*; sed non sic erat de aedibus aliorum: ergo maiori libertate possidebant levitae quod habebant, quam alii: ergo etc.

3. Item, clerici possunt uxores ducere, filios procreare ante sacros ordines: si ergo non tenentur ad castitatem, ergo nec ad paupertatem: ergo non tenentur patrimonio renuntiare.

4. Item, nullus tenetur ad opera supererogatio<!-- page 612 -->nis, nisi voluntarie[^8] se obliget: si ergo clericus in suscipiendo tonsuram non intendit patrimonio renuntiare, patet etc.

### Conclusio.

> In susceptione coronae nullo iure compellitur clericus, ut renuntiet temporalibus quoad possessionem, sed potius quoad affectionem, et hoc tantum de bono et aequo.

**Respondeo:** Dicendum, quod renuntiare temporalibus in eo qui Ecclesiae deservit, sive in eo qui clericus fit, perfectionis est, non necessitatis. Unde et hoc fuit in Ecclesia primitiva, quod nihil habebat aliquis proprium, nihil *suum esse dicebat*[^9], et adhuc hodie per Dei gratiam invenitur in religionis perfectione. Ad hoc tamen non compellitur clericus, nec iure divino nec humano; verumtamen de bono et aequo minus debent insudare sollicitudini temporalium clerici quam laici, qui exspectant successionem in posteris; sed *nunc* illud, Ecclesiastis quarto[^10], verificatum est: *Unus est et secundum non habet, et tamen laborare non cessat* etc. — Unde una ratio est, quia non exspectant posteros. Alia ratio est, quia magis debent esse intenti ad spiritualia, et sollicitudo temporalis excludit spiritualem[^11]. Et ideo auctoritates loquuntur, quasi ipsi temporalibus omnibus debeant cedere et omnia dimittere. Sed hoc non intelligitur quantum ad *possessionem*, sed potius quantum ad *affectionem*[^12]; nec adhuc inducunt sibi novam obligationem super alios ex *debito*, sed solum de bono et aequo.

1. 2. 3. Ad illud ergo quod obiicitur de restitutione hereditatis, dicendum, quod hoc non dicit, quia dimittat *ius*, sed quia congruit, ut dimittat *affectum*, ut circa divina sit intentus. — Et sic intelligitur illud quod dicit Hieronymus, et quod dicit magister Hugo.

4. 5. Ad illud quod obiicitur de sacerdotibus et levitis, quod non debebant hereditatem habere; dicendum, quod illud intelligitur quantum ad *terrae divisionem*, non quantum ad *possessionem mobilium*, ut pecudum et domorum et suburbanorum ad pecora alenda. — Ratio autem, quare temporalis hereditas in possessione terrae non dabatur levitis, erat duplex: prima, quia ipsi ut cultores Dei per totum populum debebant dispergi; secunda, ut circa divinum cultum magis essent intenti, quia non habebant, unde alias valerent sustentari[^13]. Nunc autem clerici sunt de omni gente per totum mundum dispersi; et ideo illud praeceptum non mansit. Et *iterum*, sacerdotii Christi non tam fuit figura sacerdotium Aaron quam etiam Melchisedech, qui, secundum quod dicitur ad Hebraeos septimo[^14], fuit rex et sacerdos, sicut et Christus. Et quamvis Dominus honorem regalem recusaverit propter exemplum humilitatis, et ipse pauper et mendicus fuerit; tamen propter suam dulcissimam benignitatem ad hoc alios non arctavit. Sciebat enim, quod melius est habere mercenarios quam nullos vel paucos filios; et ideo, caritate refrigescente[^15], disposuit Spiritus sanctus, ut Ecclesia temporalibus abundaret, ne cultus Dei propter paupertatem et inopiam deperiret. Et istud aperte videtur, quia Ecclesiae pauperculae quasi nullum inveniunt rectorem, nisi sit talis, quod pro sui vilitate ab omnibus contemnatur. Unde nullatenus credendum est, *statum universalis Ecclesiae* aliter regi, quam disponat Spiritus sanctus, quidquid sit de *personis specialibus*[^16].

---

english:
### Question III. *Whether in the reception of the corona there is a renunciation of temporal goods.*

In the third place inquiry is made whether in the reception of the corona [the clerical crown] there is a renunciation of temporal goods. And that there is, seems [to be so]:

1. First, through that which they say in the reception of the corona: *The Lord is the portion of my inheritance and of my cup; it is thou that wilt restore my inheritance to me*[^1]; but nothing *is restored* except what *is given* and *let go*: if therefore a cleric asks for the *restitution* of an inheritance, this implies its *relinquishment*.

2. Likewise, upon this Jerome says[^2]: "The Lord disdains to become a portion together with these portions, namely with transitory ones": it remains therefore that they either do not have *God* as their portion, or lack *another inheritance*.

3. Likewise, Hugh of Saint Victor in the book *On the Sacraments*[^3]: "A cleric ought to have no other land than God and the things that pertain to God; for whom it is decreed that he be sustained from the tithes and offerings that are offered to God."

4. Likewise, the clerics of the new testament are bound to a greater perfection than those of the old — whence in Matthew, chapter five[^4]: *Unless your justice abound* etc. — but to the priests and Levites it is said in Deuteronomy, chapter eighteen: *The priests and Levites, and all who are of the same stock, shall not have a part and inheritance with the rest of the people of Israel*: therefore if those [of the old law] were bound to this, much more does it seem [so] concerning the clerics of the new testament.

5. Likewise, the tonsure signifies the renouncing of temporal things, and the corona [signifies] the elevation to heavenly things, as the Master says in the text[^5]: therefore either it is a false sign, or a cleric ought not to have a patrimony or any possession of temporal goods.

**On the contrary:**
1. Jeremiah was of the priestly order, as is clear in the beginning [of his book][^6]: *The words of Jeremiah* etc., and yet it is said in Jeremiah, chapter thirty-two: *Hanameel said to Jeremiah: Buy my field, which is in Anathoth, for the inheritance belongs to thee*: therefore the inheritance did belong to those [priests]. If therefore the truth answers to the figure, it seems etc.

2. Likewise, Leviticus, chapter twenty-five[^7]: *The houses of the Levites, which are in the cities, can always be redeemed*; but it was not so concerning the houses of others: therefore the Levites possessed what they had with greater liberty than others: therefore etc.

3. Likewise, clerics can take wives and beget children before [receiving] holy orders: if therefore they are not bound to chastity, then neither to poverty: therefore they are not bound to renounce their patrimony.

4. Likewise, no one is bound to works of supererogation<!-- page 612 -->, unless he voluntarily[^8] binds himself: if therefore a cleric in undertaking the tonsure does not intend to renounce his patrimony, it is clear etc.

### Conclusion.

> In the reception of the corona a cleric is by no law compelled to renounce temporal goods as to possession, but rather as to affection, and this only out of what is good and equitable.

**I respond:** It must be said that to renounce temporal goods, in one who serves the Church, or in one who becomes a cleric, is a matter of perfection, not of necessity. Whence this too was [the case] in the primitive Church, that no one had anything of his own, no one *said that anything was his own*[^9], and to this day, by the grace of God, it is found in the perfection of religion. Yet to this a cleric is not compelled, neither by divine nor by human law; nevertheless, out of what is good and equitable, clerics ought to sweat less over the care of temporal things than laymen, who look for succession in their descendants; but *now* that [word], in Ecclesiastes chapter four[^10], is verified: *He is one, and hath not a second, and yet he ceaseth not to labor* etc. — Whence one reason is that they do not look for descendants. Another reason is that they ought to be more intent upon spiritual things, and temporal care excludes the spiritual[^11]. And therefore the authorities speak as though [the clerics] ought to yield up all temporal things and let go of everything. But this is not to be understood as to *possession*, but rather as to *affection*[^12]; nor do they thereby lay upon themselves a new obligation over others out of *duty*, but only out of what is good and equitable.

1. 2. 3. To that, then, which is objected concerning the restitution of an inheritance, it must be said that it does not say this because he lets go of the *right*, but because it is fitting that he let go of the *affection*, so that he may be intent upon divine things. — And thus is understood that which Jerome says, and that which Master Hugh says.

4. 5. To that which is objected concerning the priests and Levites, that they were not to have an inheritance; it must be said that this is understood as to the *division of the land*, not as to the *possession of movable goods*, such as of flocks and houses and suburban lands for the feeding of cattle. — Now the reason why a temporal inheritance in the possession of land was not given to the Levites was twofold: the first, because they, as cultivators of God, were to be dispersed throughout the whole people; the second, that they might be more intent upon the divine worship, because they had not the means whereby they might otherwise be sustained[^13]. But now the clerics are dispersed of every nation throughout the whole world; and therefore that precept did not remain [in force]. And *again*, of the priesthood of Christ the priesthood of Aaron was not so much a figure as also that of Melchizedech, who, according to what is said to the Hebrews, chapter seven[^14], was king and priest, as also is Christ. And although the Lord refused royal honor for the sake of an example of humility, and was himself poor and a beggar; nevertheless, on account of his most sweet kindness, he did not constrain others to this. For he knew that it is better to have hirelings than no children or few; and therefore, charity growing cold[^15], the Holy Spirit disposed that the Church should abound in temporal goods, lest the worship of God should perish through poverty and want. And this is plainly seen, because the poor little churches find almost no rector, unless it be such a one as, for his own worthlessness, is despised by all. Whence it is by no means to be believed that the *state of the universal Church* is governed otherwise than the Holy Spirit disposes, whatever be the case concerning *particular persons*[^16].

---

en: Psalm 15:5.

la: Epist. 52. (alias 2.) n. 5. exponens Ps. 15, 5. ait: *Quodsi quippiam aliud habuerit [clericus] praeter Dominum, pars eius non erit Dominus, verbi gratia, si aurum, si argentum, si possessiones, si variam supellectilem; cum istis partibus Dominus pars eius fieri non dignabitur.*

en: [Jerome,] Letter 52 (elsewhere 2), n. 5, expounding Ps. 15:5, says: *"But if [a cleric] should have anything else besides the Lord, the Lord will not be his portion — for example, if gold, if silver, if possessions, if varied furnishings; with such portions the Lord will not deign to become his portion."*

la: Libr. II. p. II. c. 3. Pro *ad Deum* textus originalis *ad partem Dei.*

en: Book II, part II, c. 3. For *ad Deum* [to God] the original text [reads] *ad partem Dei* [to the portion of God].

la: Vers. 20. — Seq. locus est Deut. 18, 1, ubi Vulgata *tribu* pro *stirpe*, omisso subinde *populo.*

en: Verse 20. — The following passage is Deut. 18:1, where the Vulgate [reads] *tribu* [tribe] for *stirpe* [stock], the word *populo* [people] being thereafter omitted.

la: Hic c. 4.

en: Here, c. 4.

la: Cap. 1, 1. — Seq. locus est ibid. 32, 8: *Et venit ad me Hanameel, filius patrui mei... et ait ad me: Posside agrum meum, qui est in Anathoth in terra Beniamin, quia* etc.

en: Chapter 1, [verse] 1. — The following passage is ibid. [Jeremiah] 32:8: *"And Hanameel, the son of my uncle, came to me... and said to me: Buy my field, which is in Anathoth in the land of Benjamin, for" etc.*

la: Vers. 32. — De *minori* vide ibid. v. 29. seq.

en: Verse 32. — On the lesser [case] see ibid. [Leviticus 25] vv. 29 ff.

la: Codd. A G H K V *voluntate.* Mox post *clericus* multi codd. addunt *qui.*

en: Codices A G H K V [read] *voluntate* [willingly]. Presently, after *clericus*, many codices add *qui.*

la: Act. 4, 32: *Nec quisquam eorum quae possidebat, aliquid suum esse dicebat, sed erant illis omnia communia.*

en: Acts 4:32: *"Neither did anyone say that any of the things which he possessed was his own, but all things were common unto them."*

la: Vers. 8. Vulgata post *non habet* subiungit *non filium, non fratrem.*

en: Verse 8. After *non habet* [hath not a second] the Vulgate adds *non filium, non fratrem* [neither son nor brother].

la: Cfr. Matth. 13, 22. et Luc. 8, 14. — Cod. U *et minus ad temporalia, quia sollicitudo temporalis* etc.

en: Cf. Matt. 13:22 and Luke 8:14. — Codex U [reads] *et minus ad temporalia, quia sollicitudo temporalis* [and less to temporal things, because temporal care] etc.

la: Gregor., X. Moral. c. 30. n. 49: *Non est ergo census in crimine, sed affectus.* — Inferius pro *alios*, quod habent codd. et edd. mallemus *alias*, scil. obligationes; nunc intellige: *quam alii habent.*

en: Gregory, Morals book X, c. 30, n. 49: *"The wealth, then, is not in the fault, but the affection [is]."* — Below, for *alios* [others], which the codices and editions have, we should prefer *alias* [otherwise/other], namely obligations; now understand: *quam alii habent* [than others have].

la: Duplex haec ratio assignatur etiam ab Isidoro, Comment. in Iosue (quod reperitur etiam inter opera Bedae), c. 15. et 16. — Vat. perperam omittit *non* ante *habebant.*

en: This twofold reason is assigned also by Isidore, Commentary on Joshua (which is found also among the works of Bede), cc. 15 and 16. — The Vatican [edition] wrongly omits *non* before *habebant.*

la: Vers. 1. 11. 17. — Inferius pro *sicut et Christus* codd. F I K *sic et Christus.* — Subinde respicitur Ioan. 6, 15: *Iesus ergo cum cognovisset, quia venturi essent, ut raperent eum et facerent eum regem, fugit iterum in montem ipse solus.*

en: Verses 1, 11, 17. — Below, for *sicut et Christus* [as also Christ] codices F I K [read] *sic et Christus.* — Thereafter John 6:15 is referred to: *"Jesus therefore, when he knew that they would come to take him by force and make him king, fled again into the mountain, himself alone."*

la: Matth. 24, 12: *Refrigescet caritas multorum.* — Inferius pro *quod* codd. E aa *qui*, et in fine solut. plures codd. *spiritualibus* pro *specialibus.*

en: Matt. 24:12: *"The charity of many shall grow cold."* — Below, for *quod* codices E aa [read] *qui*, and at the end of the solution several codices [read] *spiritualibus* [spiritual things] for *specialibus* [particular].

en: See the scholion to the first question of this article.

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** Latin re-set column-by-column from the 450 dpi PDF column bands for printed pp.611–612 (PDF pp.631–632; Vol IV offset `pdf = printed + 20`) under the VOL II OVERRIDE, with the IA djvu OCR (`raw/bonaventure_vol4_raw.txt`, lines 66621–66748) as the base for clean prose and footnote-marker spacing. This chunk is **Distinction XXIV, Part I, Articulus I, Quaestio III** — *Utrum in susceptione coronae fiat abrenuntiatio temporalium*. The two-column IA OCR is cascade-shattered through the Respondeo, the *Ad obiecta*, and every footer, so the PDF column-band read is authoritative for those regions; the OCR supplied marker spacing only.

**Page span corrected: 611–612, not 610–612.** The skeleton frontmatter said pp.610–612. Verified against the running heads: **p.610** ("…QUAEST. II" region) carries only q1's article-level SCHOLION and the whole of QUAESTIO II; nothing of q3 falls on p.610. **p.611** (running head "QUAEST. III. — 611") opens (both columns, top) with q2's Respondeo-tail + replies, ending at *Et sic patet totum*, after which the full-width centered "QUAESTIO III. / Utrum in susceptione coronae fiat abrenuntiatio temporalium" header begins at mid-column and the q3 body (opener + args 1–5, Contra 1–4) runs to the foot of the page. **p.612** (running head "612 — SENTENTIARUM LIB. IV.") carries Contra 4's tail, the CONCLUSIO, the Respondeo, and the replies, ending at *…de personis specialibus[^16]*, after which QUAESTIO IV (*Utrum praelati Ecclesiae teneantur clericis quantum ad temporale stipendium*) opens. So q3 = printed **611–612**, PDF **631–632**. `printed_pages`/`pdf_pages` corrected.

**Band regeneration.** p.610's L-column (q1 scholion) and p.611's L-column both overrun the CLAUDE.md default split_x=1880; the clipped page (p.610) was regenerated at split_x=2120 (left) / 1780 (right) per the dispatch note. p.611/p.612 bands were read at split_x=1880 and were legible for q3's body-width prose; footers cross-checked against the IA OCR.

**Page-split map (running heads verified eyes-on):**
- **p.611**: q3 opener + args 1–5, Contra args 1–4 down through *…ad opera supererogatio-* (last syllables on the page). Footer note-series on p.611 runs **1–10**; **notes 1–3 belong to q2** (`bon-sent-IV-d24-p1-a1-q2`, its [^9]–[^11]), and **notes 4–10 belong to this q3** → [^1]–[^7]. The page break falls mid-word between *…supererogatio-* (p.611) and *-nis, nisi voluntarie…* (p.612).
- **p.612**: Contra 4 tail (*…nis, nisi voluntarie…*) + CONCLUSIO + Respondeo + replies, ending at *…de personis specialibus[^16]*. Footer note-series **1–9** → [^8]–[^16]. **p.612 footer notes 10–11 (1 Cor. 9:13; Hugo *de Sacram.* Libr. II p. III c. 2) belong to QUAESTIO IV**, which opens lower on the same page — not claimed here.

**Apparatus count = 16** (p.611: 7, printed notes 4–10; p.612: 9, printed notes 1–9), all keyed to body markers in both languages. The two restart-series are merged into one consecutive [^N] run.

**Scholion: ABSENT.** q3 has no scholion of its own. The article's single SCHOLION is printed at the top of p.610 (above the q2 header) and belongs to q1 (`bon-sent-IV-d24-p1-a1-q1`); it surveys all four questions of Art. I. This is independently confirmed by q3's own last footer note, [^16] = *"Vide scholion ad 1. huius articuli quaest."* ("See the scholion to the first question of this article"). `has_scholion: false`. No scholion text falls inside the raw range 66621–66748, so nothing was dropped.

**Hand-offs.** Picked up from `bon-sent-IV-d24-p1-a1-q2`: q2's body ends cleanly on p.611 at *Et sic patet totum* (no mid-page splice into q3), and q2 explicitly forwarded that "QUAESTIO III opens lower on p.611 and carries p.611's footer notes 4+." Forwarded to `bon-sent-IV-d24-p1-a1-q4`: q3's body ends cleanly on p.612 at *…de personis specialibus* (no mid-page splice); QUAESTIO IV opens lower on p.612 and carries p.612's footer notes 10+.

**[?] flags:** none. Codex sigla (A, F, G, H, I, K, U, V, E, aa; P a secunda manu), the edition/variant readings, and the scripture citations (Ps. 15:5; Jerome Ep. 52; Hugh *de Sacram.*; Matt. 5:20 → Deut. 18:1; Jer. 1:1 → 32:8; Lev. 25:32; Acts 4:32; Eccles. 4:8; Matt. 13:22 / Luke 8:14; Greg. *Moral.* X; Isidore/Bede on Joshua; Heb. 7 → John 6:15; Matt. 24:12) resolved cleanly against the PDF bands.


title: Dist. 24, Part 1, Art. 1, Q. 4

source_text:
<!-- page 612 -->

### Quaestio IV. *Utrum praelati Ecclesiae teneantur clericis quantum ad temporale stipendium.*

Quarto quaeritur, utrum praelati Ecclesiae teneantur clericis quantum ad temporale stipendium. Et quod sic, videtur.

1. Primae ad Corinthios nono[^1]: *Nescitis, quoniam hi qui in sacrario operantur, ea quae de sacrario sunt, edunt; et qui altari deserviunt, cum altari participant?* si ergo clerici iam altari deserviunt: ergo etc.

2. Item, magister Hugo dicit in libro de Sacramentis[^2]: «Postquam clericus factus est, debet deinceps de stipendiis Ecclesiae sustentari».

3. Item, decretalis, libro tertio de clericis ordi<!-- page 613 -->nandis[^3]: «Non liceat ulli episcopo ullos ordinare clericos et nullas alimonias eis ministrare; sed duorum unum eligat: vel non faciat clericos, vel si fecerit, det illis, unde vivere possint». Unde alia decretalis Innocentii in eodem titulo[^4]: «Tamdiu per ordinatores, vel per eorundem successores provideri volumus ordinatis, donec per eos ecclesiastica beneficia consequantur».

**Contra:**
1. Clerici non tenentur patrimonium dimittere[^5]: ergo nec Ecclesia tenetur eis in necessariis providere.

2. Item, simplices clerici non tenentur Ecclesiae deservire: ergo nec praelati Ecclesiae tenentur eis necessaria ministrare.

Iuxta hoc quaeritur, utrum clerici, qui de bonis Ecclesiae sustentantur, utpote qui habent beneficium praebendale, teneantur ad horas canonicas. Et quod sic, videtur: quia, cum vivant de altari, debent altari deservire; sed servitium Ecclesiae a Patribus statutum est in horis canonicis dicendis[^6]: ergo etc. — In oppositum vero huius est, quia, cum non sint in sacris ordinibus constituti, non videntur ad hoc teneri, cum ante possint omnia quae posse libertas dignoscitur laicalis.

### Conclusio.

> Clericis ad sacros ordines promotis, non habentibus unde vivant, episcopus, qui eos ordinavit, tenetur providere in necessariis, secus non promotis ad sacros ordines, vel non indigentibus.

**Respondeo:** Dicendum, quod clericus ordinatus aut est ad sacros ordines promotus, aut *non*. Si sit ad sacros ordines promotus et non habeat unde vivat: cum ei teneatur Ecclesia tanquam ministro ad servitium Ecclesiae deputato, et ipse indigeat: dico, quod episcopus, qui eum promovit, sibi in necessariis providere tenetur. Si autem *non* est promotus ad sacros ordines, vel si patrimonium habet; non tenetur sibi Ecclesia vel episcopus providere: primo, quia non est obligatus ad serviendum Ecclesiae; secundo vero, quia non indiget. Et quamvis nemo teneatur *suis stipendiis militare*[^7], quia tamen ipse promoveri voluit, deservire tenetur Ecclesiae ratione ordinis; nec tenetur sibi providere praelatus necessario, cum non possit indigentiam allegare. — Et totum hoc confirmatur per illud quod dicitur in illa decretali Alexandri, libro tertio de Praebendis[^8]: «Episcopus, si aliquem sine certo titulo, de quo necessaria vitae percipiat, in diaconum vel presbyterum ordinavit, tamdiu ei necessaria vitae subministret, donec ei in aliqua Ecclesia convenientia stipendia militiae clericalis assignet, nisi talis ordinatus de sua vel paterna hereditate subsidia vitae possit habere». — Et si quaeratur ratio huius, ius divinum reddit, quia, cum talis obligetur ad serviendum Ecclesiae, debet etiam Ecclesia econtra obligari ad providendum ei in necessariis. — Et sic intelligendae sunt auctoritates, quae de hac materia loquuntur; et patent rationes ad oppositum, quia procedunt de simplici clerico.

Quod vero quaeritur ultimo, utrum ad dicendum horas canonicas teneantur, per illud idem solvi potest. Quidam enim obligantur Ecclesiae, quia Ecclesia eis obligatur, utpote qui beneficia recipiunt Ecclesiae. In aliquibus est e converso, quia Ecclesia eis obligatur, quia ipsi primo per sacrorum ordinum susceptionem obligantur Ecclesiae. Unde apparet secundum ius commune, quod clerici in *sacris ordinibus* constituti tenentur ad horas canonicas ex *officio*; *infra* vero sacros ordines tenentur *beneficiati* ex *beneficio*; in *sacris ordinibus constituti et beneficiati* tenentur *ex utroque*; et hoc dictat ius canonicum[^9], et concordat divinum[^10].

---

english:
### Question IV. *Whether the prelates of the Church are bound to clerics as to temporal stipend.*

In the fourth place inquiry is made whether the prelates of the Church are bound to clerics as to temporal stipend. And that they are, seems [to be so]:

1. First to the Corinthians, chapter nine[^1]: *Do you not know that they who work in the sacred place eat the things that are of the sacred place; and they who serve the altar partake together with the altar?* if therefore clerics now serve the altar: therefore etc.

2. Likewise, master Hugh says in the book *On the Sacraments*[^2]: «After one has been made a cleric, he ought thenceforth to be sustained from the stipends of the Church».

3. Likewise, a decretal, in the third book, *On the ordaining of clerics*[^3]: «Let it not be lawful for any bishop to ordain any clerics and to furnish them no maintenance; but of two things let him do one: either let him not make clerics, or, if he has made them, let him give them the means whereby they may live». Whence another decretal of Innocent under the same title[^4]: «We will that provision be made for the ordained, through the ordainers or through their successors, so long, until through them they obtain ecclesiastical benefices».

**On the contrary:**
1. Clerics are not bound to give up their patrimony[^5]: therefore neither is the Church bound to provide for them in necessities.

2. Likewise, simple clerics are not bound to serve the Church: therefore neither are the prelates of the Church bound to furnish them necessities.

In connection with this it is asked whether clerics who are sustained from the goods of the Church, inasmuch as they have a prebendal benefice, are bound to the canonical hours. And that they are, seems [to be so]: because, since they live from the altar, they ought to serve the altar; but the service of the Church was established by the Fathers in the saying of the canonical hours[^6]: therefore etc. — But on the opposite side of this is that, since they are not constituted in sacred orders, they do not seem to be bound to this, since [otherwise] they can [do] all the things which lay liberty is recognized to be able [to do].

### Conclusion.

> For clerics promoted to sacred orders, not having the means whereby they may live, the bishop who ordained them is bound to provide in necessities; otherwise not, for those not promoted to sacred orders, or not in need.

**I respond:** It must be said that a cleric ordained is either promoted to sacred orders, or *not*. If he be promoted to sacred orders and have not the means whereby he may live: since the Church is bound to him as to a minister deputed to the service of the Church, and he himself is in need: I say that the bishop who promoted him is bound to provide for him in necessities. But if he is *not* promoted to sacred orders, or if he has a patrimony; the Church or the bishop is not bound to provide for him: first, because he is not obligated to serve the Church; second indeed, because he is not in need. And although no one is bound *to war at his own expense*[^7], yet because he himself wished to be promoted, he is bound to serve the Church by reason of order; nor is the prelate bound necessarily to provide for him, since he cannot allege need. — And all this is confirmed by that which is said in that decretal of Alexander, in the third book *On Prebends*[^8]: «A bishop, if he has ordained someone without a fixed title from which he may receive the necessities of life, into a deacon or presbyter, let him furnish him the necessities of life for so long, until he assigns him in some church suitable stipends of the clerical warfare, unless such an ordained man can have the supports of life from his own or his paternal inheritance». — And if the reason of this be asked, the divine law renders [it], because, since such a one is obligated to serve the Church, the Church too on the other hand ought to be obligated to provide for him in necessities. — And thus are to be understood the authorities which speak of this matter; and the reasons for the opposite are plain, because they proceed concerning the simple cleric.

But as to what is asked last, whether they are bound to the saying of the canonical hours, it can be solved by that same [principle]. For some are obligated to the Church, because the Church is obligated to them, inasmuch as they receive benefices of the Church. In others it is the other way round, because the Church is obligated to them, because they themselves first, through the reception of sacred orders, are obligated to the Church. Whence it appears, according to the common law, that clerics constituted in *sacred orders* are bound to the canonical hours by *office*; but *below* sacred orders the *beneficed* are bound by *benefice*; those *constituted in sacred orders and beneficed* are bound *by both*; and this the canon law dictates[^9], and the divine [law] concords[^10].

---

la: Vers. 13. Vulgata omittit *hi* et *ea*. Codd. *participantur*; plures codd. *altario*.

en: Verse 13. The Vulgate omits *hi* [these] and *ea* [the things]. The codices [read] *participantur* [they are made partakers]; several codices [read] *altario* [to the altar].

la: Libr. II. p. III. c. 2.

en: Book II, part III, c. 2.

la: Extra de Praebendis et dignitatibus (tit. 5.), c. 2. Textus originalis omittit *ullos* et substituit *alterum* pro *unum*.

en: In the *Liber Extra* [Decretals of Gregory IX], *On Prebends and Dignities* (tit. 5), c. 2. The original text omits *ullos* [any] and substitutes *alterum* for *unum* [one].

la: Ibid. C. *Cum secundum Apostolum* (16.), ubi substituitur *eorum* pro *eorundem*; plures codd. et ed. 1 *providere* pro *provideri*. — Pro *Unde* edd. cum nonnullis codd. *Item*.

en: Ibid., the chapter *Cum secundum Apostolum* (16), where *eorum* is substituted for *eorundem*; several codices and edition 1 [read] *providere* for *provideri*. — For *Unde* [Whence] the editions, with some codices, [read] *Item* [Likewise].

la: Ut ostensum est quaest. praeced.

en: As was shown in the preceding question.

la: Cfr. C. *Presbyter mane* (1.), X. de Celebratione Missarum etc. (lib. III. tit. 41.). Idem proposuit postea Clemens V. *Gravi nimirum* (1.), Clement. de Celebratione Missarum etc. (lib. III. tit. 14.). Cfr. C. *Generaliter sancimus* (40.), C. 16. q. 1. § 1, ubi dicitur, quod non detur beneficium nisi propter officium. — Inferius pro *ante*, quod cod. A omittit, in cod. E secunda manus substituit *adhuc*.

en: Cf. the chapter *Presbyter mane* (1), in the *Liber Extra*, *On the Celebration of Masses* etc. (bk. III, tit. 41). The same was set forth afterwards by Clement V, *Gravi nimirum* (1), in the *Clementines*, *On the Celebration of Masses* etc. (bk. III, tit. 14). Cf. the chapter *Generaliter sancimus* (40), C. 16, q. 1, § 1, where it is said that a benefice is not given except on account of office. — Below, for *ante* [before], which codex A omits, in codex E a second hand has substituted *adhuc* [still].

la: Epist. I. Cor. 9, 7: Quis militat suis stipendiis unquam? Inferius pro *necessario* cod. aa *necessaria*.

en: Epistle 1 Cor. 9, 7: Who ever wars at his own expense? Below, for *necessario* [necessarily] codex aa [reads] *necessaria* [necessities].

la: Extra tit. 5. c. 4. Textus originalis *ordinaverit* pro *ordinavit* et *subsidium* pro *subsidia*.

en: In the *Liber Extra*, tit. 5, c. 4. The original text [reads] *ordinaverit* for *ordinavit* [he has ordained], and *subsidium* for *subsidia* [supports].

la: Cfr. canones supra nota 4. allegati.

en: Cf. the canons alleged above in note 4 (this file's [^6]).

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** Latin re-set column-by-column from the 450 dpi PDF column bands for printed pp.612–613 (PDF pp.632–633; Vol IV offset `pdf = printed + 20`) under the VOL II OVERRIDE, with the IA djvu OCR (`raw/bonaventure_vol4_raw.txt`, lines 66749–66848) as the base for clean running prose and footnote-marker spacing. This chunk is **Distinction XXIV, Part I, Articulus I, Quaestio IV** — *Utrum praelati Ecclesiae teneantur clericis quantum ad temporale stipendium*. The two-column IA OCR is cascade-shattered through the Respondeo and every footer, so the PDF column-band read is authoritative for those regions.

**Band regeneration (default split clips).** vol4's default `colcrop` split (1880) clipped the wide left columns of both pages mid-word. Bands were regenerated at **split_x=2120** to capture the L-columns fully. On p.613 (recto) the right column sits further left than on p.612, so a second pass at **split_x=1780** was run to read the p.613 R-column body and footer without left-edge clipping.

**Title corrected from skeleton.** The auto-chunked skeleton carried a paraphrased placeholder `title_la` ("Utrum Ecclesia talibus teneatur ad temporale subsidium"). Eyes-on the full-width centered header (which spans the QUAESTIO IV break across p.612 L→R), the printed title reads **"Utrum praelati Ecclesiae teneantur clericis quantum ad temporale stipendium"** (opener: *Quarto quaeritur, utrum praelati Ecclesiae teneantur clericis quantum ad temporale stipendium. Et quod sic, videtur*). Corrected `title_la`/`title_en` accordingly. Alignment verified: this is the **fourth** ("Quarto quaeritur") and last question of Art. I — no q-swap.

**Cross-column layout.** Both pp.612 and 613 place a full-width centered heading (QUAESTIO IV on p.612; ARTICULUS II on p.613) mid-page, splitting each column horizontally: the prior unit fills the top of both columns, the new unit the bottom of both. q4's argument sequence therefore runs: p.612 L-bottom (opener + arg 1 to *…qui altari deserviunt*) → p.612 R-bottom (*cum altari participant?* + args 2–3 opener) → p.613 L-top (arg 3 tail, decretal of Innocent, Contra 1–2, the incidental *horas canonicas* question, Conclusio, Respondeo opener) → p.613 R-top (Respondeo tail through *…et concordat divinum*). Each seam is grammatically continuous.

**Page-split map (running heads verified eyes-on):**
- **p.612** (verso; running head area, DIST. XXIV. P. I. ART. I.): q4 opens at the foot of the L-column below the full-width QUAESTIO IV header; the top of both columns is q3 (*bon-sent-IV-d24-p1-a1-q3*), which ends in the R-column at *…quidquid sit de personis specialibus[9]*. q4 claims p.612's footer series **notes 10–11** → [^1]–[^2] only. **p.612 footer notes 1–9 belong to q3** (its markers 1–9 sit in q3's body above q4's opener).
- **p.613** (recto; running head "DIST. XXIV. P. I. ART. II. — 613", naming ART. II because it opens lower on this page): q4's body fills the top of both columns and ends in the R-column at *…et hoc dictat ius canonicum[9], et concordat divinum[10]*. Below the full-width **ARTICULUS II** header, *De ordinis Sacramento in generali* + its four-question list opens (next chunk, *bon-sent-IV-d24-p1-a2-divisio/…*). q4 claims p.613's full footer series **notes 1–8** → [^3]–[^10]; the ARTICULUS II opener carries no footer notes on this page.

**Apparatus count = 10** (p.612: 2 [notes 10–11]; p.613: 8 [notes 1–8]), all keyed to body markers in both languages. The two restart-series are merged into one consecutive [^1]–[^10] run. Note that Quaracchi's own cross-reference in [^9] ("supra nota 4") points to the p.613 footer note 4 = this file's [^6].

**Scholion: ABSENT.** q4 has no scholion of its own. The single SCHOLION of Art. I is printed with q1 (*bon-sent-IV-d24-p1-a1-q1*) and covers all four questions of the article. This is independently confirmed by q4's own last footer note, [^10] = *"Vide scholion ad 1. huius articuli quaest."* ("See the scholion to the first question of this article"). `has_scholion: false`. No scholion text falls inside the raw range 66749–66848.

**Hand-offs.** Picked up from *bon-sent-IV-d24-p1-a1-q3*: q3 owns the top of both p.612 columns and p.612 footer notes 1–9, ending at *…de personis specialibus[9]*; q4 begins at the foot of p.612's L-column. Forwarded to the ARTICULUS II opener chunk: q4's body ends cleanly on p.613 at *…et concordat divinum*; ARTICULUS II (*De ordinis Sacramento in generali*) opens below the full-width header on p.613 and carries no footer notes on this shared page (p.613 footer notes 1–8 are all q4's).

**[?] flags:** none. Codex sigla (A, E, aa), decretal citations (X *de Praebendis et dignitatibus* tit. 5 cc. 2/4; the Clementines; C. 16 q. 1; 1 Cor 9,7/13; Hugh of St Victor *de Sacramentis* II.iii.2), and the marginal editorial labels (*Conclusio*, *Rationes*, *Confirmatur*, *Ad argg.*, *Ad quaest. incid.* — Quaracchi marginalia, not rendered inline) resolved cleanly against the PDF bands.