title: Dist. 50, Part 1, Art. 1, Q. 1

source_text:
<!-- page 1035 -->

### Articulus I. *De subversione voluntatis damnatorum.*
### Quaestio I. *Utrum damnati velint, se peccasse.*

> **De numeratione notarum.** Quaracchi restarts its footnote numbering on every printed page. The labels below are page-qualified: `p1035c` = the *Notae ad Commentarium* register of page 1035 (that page also carries a separate register for the Master's text, which belongs to the littera chunk), then notes 1–11 of page 1036 and notes 1–3 of page 1037.

Quantum ergo ad primum proceditur sic, et ostenditur, quod damnati vellent, se peccasse:

1. Quia Augustinus *de Fide ad Petrum*[^p1035c-1] dicit, quod «bonam habere nullatenus poterunt voluntatem»; sed nolle, se peccasse, est voluntatis bonae: ergo non poterunt hoc habere: ergo si considerabunt peccatum suum, cum non possint nolle, necesse habent velle.

<!-- page 1036 -->

2. Item, voluntas hominis post mortem est invertibilis, sicut voluntas angeli mali[^p1036-1]; sed angelus malus vult, se peccasse: ergo etc.

3. Item, malitia inclinat voluntatem ad malum, sicut gratia ad bonum; sed malitia remanebit in damnatis, sicut et gratia in Beatis: ergo sicut Beati bona, quae semel voluerunt, semper volunt; ita damnati semper volunt mala.

4. Item, quod quis dimittat actum peccandi in praesenti, non potest esse sine gratia gratis data[^p1036-2], multo fortius de peccandi voluntate: ergo si nulla gratia datur ipsis reprobis, nec natura melioratur; ergo peccandi voluntatem nunquam amittunt.

**Contra:**

1. Sapientiae quinto[^p1036-3]: *Dicent intra se, poenitentiam agentes* etc.; constat, quod illa est consideratio rationis deliberantis: ergo videtur, quod velint non peccasse.

2. Item, Augustinus in libro *Octoginta trium Quaestionum*[^p1036-4]: «Videmus, inquit, ferissimas bestias dolore poenarum a maximis voluptatibus abstinere»; sed damnati non ardentius appetunt quam bestiae atroces, et maxime cruciantur: ergo eorum appetitus retrahitur, et sic etc.

3. Item, peccatum non placebat, quia peccatum, sed propter libidinosam delectationem[^p1036-5]; sed in damnatis exclusa est omnis libidinosa delectatio: ergo nullum peccatum eis placet.

4. Item, mala voluntas eo ipso, quod mala est, est contra Deum, et eo ipso, quod est contra Deum, est meritoria poenae: ergo semper merentur poenam, et ita debet semper eis poena augeri, et sic in infinitum. Sed sic non dicitur[^p1036-6]: ergo etc.

5. Item, voluntas mala eo ipso, quod mala, est inordinata: ergo quando exit in actum novum, de novo inordinatur; sed nihil potest Deus relinquere inordinatum: ergo si peccatum non ordinatur nisi in poena[^p1036-7], et est nova inordinatio; ergo nova poena, et ita semper cresceret.

6. Item, esto quod damnatis daretur libertas peccandi, nunquam fornicarentur; si redirent ad corpora et locum haberent, constat, quod nollent peccare, cum magis horreant tantam poenam, quam delectationem peccati diligant[^p1036-8]: ergo videtur etc.

### Conclusio

> *Damnati nolunt, se peccasse, loquendo de actu, non vero de habitu voluntatis malae.*

**Respondeo:** Dicendum, quod mala voluntas dicitur dupliciter, scilicet *actus* et *habitus*. Dico ergo, quod timor servilis *peccatoribus* non aufert *habitum* malae voluntatis, sed aufert *actum*[^p1036-9] — iste enim non vult luxuriari, quia timet puniri — de ipsa voluntate tamen habitum non aufert; quod patet, quia, si speraretur impunitas, vellet utique luxuriari. — Sic intelligendum in *damnatis*, quod dolor poenalis aufert ab ipsorum voluntate *actum* volendi peccare, quia revera damnati non appetunt luxuriari nec dominari propter poenas, quas ex illis actibus sentiunt se incurrisse; habent tamen *habitum* voluntatis malae, per quam appeterent peccare, si non crederent, se ex hoc puniri. — Si ergo quaeras, utrum damnati nolint peccasse; dico, quod nolunt, non propter hoc, quod peccatum eis displiceat, quia iniustum, sed quia eis displicet poena iusta[^p1036-10]. Et ideo malam habent voluntatem hoc volendo, et ideo adhuc vivit in eis voluntas peccandi, licet dolore poenarum impediatur, ne exeat in actum suum.

**Ad argumenta pro parte affirmativa:**

*Ad 1.* Et sic patet responsio ad primum.

*Ad 2.* Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod voluntas est invertibilis; dicendum, quod verum est de voluntate[^p1036-11] quantum ad *habitum*, in qua fit plena versio; sed non est verum de vertibilitate quantum ad *actum*.

*Ad 3.* Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod malitia inclinat sicut gratia; dicendum, quod non est simile: quia motus gratiae praemiatur in simili et convenienti, sed motus libidinis in dissimili, ut in dolore; et ideo impeditur, sed motus gratiae consummatur.

*Ad 4.* Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod abstinere a voluntate peccandi non est sine gratia; dicendum, quod loquendo de voluntate-habitu, non est sine gratia; sed in voluntate-actu distinguendum est: quia aut abstinet ab actu malo, quia *contra Deum* et quia *iniquum*; et hoc non est sine gratia gratis data — haec enim praeparat ad ulteriorem gratiam — aut quia hoc est *laesivum*, sicut aliquis dimittit forni-<!-- page 1037 -->cari vel inebriari, quia amittit visum[^p1037-1]; et talis est per naturam puram. Similiter dico, quod damnati refugiunt propter timorem poenae.

**Ad argumenta pro parte negativa:**

*Ad 1.* Ad illud quod obiicitur in contrarium, quod habent poenitentiam; dicendum, quod verum est; sed illa poenitentia est *stimulus poenitudinis*, non *correctio voluntatis*[^p1037-2]; unde si daretur libertas peccandi, ut speraretur omnino impunitas, dico, quod peccarent; sed si deberent ita puniri pro aliis, quae facerent, sicut pro his quae fecerunt, nunquam vellent peccare.

*Ad 5.* Ad illud quod quaeritur, utrum habeant aliquam inordinationem actualem voluntatis; potest dici, quod sic; sed illa inordinatio est eis versa in poenam, sicut Beatis bona voluntas in gloriam; unde sicut isti non merentur amplius bona voluntate, ita nec illi demerentur mala; et hoc dicit Augustinus, et habetur in littera[^p1037-3].

english:
### Article I. *On the subversion of the will of the damned.*
### Question I. *Whether the damned will that they had sinned.*

As to the first, then, one proceeds thus, and it is shown that the damned would will that they had sinned:

1. Because Augustine *On the Faith, to Peter*[^p1035c-1] says that "they shall in no way be able to have a good will"; but to be unwilling to have sinned is [the mark] of a good will: therefore they will not be able to have this: therefore if they shall consider their sin, since they cannot be unwilling, they must needs will [it].

2. Likewise, the will of man after death is unchangeable, like the will of the evil angel[^p1036-1]; but the evil angel wills that he had sinned: therefore etc.

3. Likewise, malice inclines the will to evil, as grace does to good; but malice will remain in the damned, as grace also does in the Blessed: therefore, just as the Blessed always will the good things which they once willed, so the damned always will evil things.

4. Likewise, that anyone should give up the act of sinning in the present cannot be without grace freely given[^p1036-2], much more [is this so] concerning the will to sin: therefore if no grace is given to the reprobate themselves, neither is their nature bettered; therefore they never lose the will to sin.

**On the contrary:**

1. Wisdom, chapter five[^p1036-3]: *They shall say within themselves, repenting* etc.; and it is agreed that this is the consideration of deliberating reason: therefore it seems that they will not to have sinned.

2. Likewise, Augustine in the book *Of Eighty-three Questions*[^p1036-4]: "We see," he says, "that the wildest beasts abstain from the greatest pleasures through the pain of punishments"; but the damned do not desire more ardently than savage beasts, and they are tormented in the highest degree: therefore their appetite is drawn back, and so etc.

3. Likewise, sin was not pleasing because it was sin, but on account of the lustful delight[^p1036-5]; but in the damned every lustful delight is excluded: therefore no sin pleases them.

4. Likewise, an evil will, by the very fact that it is evil, is against God, and by the very fact that it is against God, is deserving of punishment: therefore they always merit punishment, and so their punishment ought always to be increased, and thus to infinity. But it is not so said[^p1036-6]: therefore etc.

5. Likewise, an evil will, by the very fact that it is evil, is disordered: therefore when it goes forth into a new act, it is newly disordered; but God can leave nothing disordered: therefore if sin is not set in order except in punishment[^p1036-7], and there is a new disorder; therefore [there is] a new punishment, and so it would always be increasing.

6. Likewise, granted that liberty of sinning were given to the damned, they would never fornicate; if they returned to their bodies and had opportunity, it is agreed that they would be unwilling to sin, since they dread so great a punishment more than they love the delight of sin[^p1036-8]: therefore it seems etc.

### Conclusion

> *The damned are unwilling to have sinned, speaking of the act, but not of the habit of the evil will.*

**I respond:** It must be said that an evil will is spoken of in two ways, namely as *act* and as *habit*. I say, then, that servile fear does not take away from *sinners* the *habit* of an evil will, but takes away the *act*[^p1036-9] — for such a man does not will to be lustful, because he fears to be punished — yet from the will itself it does not take away the habit; which is plain, because, if impunity were hoped for, he would certainly will to be lustful. — So it is to be understood in the *damned*, that penal grief takes away from their will the *act* of willing to sin, because in truth the damned do not desire to be lustful nor to dominate, on account of the punishments which they feel themselves to have incurred from those acts; yet they have the *habit* of an evil will, through which they would desire to sin, if they did not believe that they would be punished for it. — If, then, you ask whether the damned are unwilling to have sinned; I say that they are unwilling, not because sin displeases them as unjust, but because the just punishment displeases them[^p1036-10]. And therefore they have an evil will in willing this, and therefore the will of sinning still lives in them, although it is impeded by the grief of punishments from going forth into its act.

**To the arguments for the affirmative side:**

*To 1.* And thus the answer to the first is plain.

*To 2.* To that which is objected, that the will is unchangeable; it must be said that this is true of the will[^p1036-11] as regards the *habit*, in which a full turning takes place; but it is not true of changeableness as regards the *act*.

*To 3.* To that which is objected, that malice inclines as grace does; it must be said that it is not alike: because the motion of grace is rewarded in what is like and fitting, but the motion of lust in what is unlike, namely in grief; and therefore it is impeded, whereas the motion of grace is brought to completion.

*To 4.* To that which is objected, that to abstain from the will of sinning is not without grace; it must be said that, speaking of the will-as-habit, it is not without grace; but in the will-as-act a distinction must be drawn: for either one abstains from the evil act because it is *against God* and because it is *iniquitous*; and this is not without grace freely given — for this prepares [one] for further grace — or because this is *harmful*, as when someone gives up fornicating or getting drunk because he is losing his sight[^p1037-1]; and such a man is [acting] by pure nature. Likewise I say that the damned shrink back on account of the fear of punishment.

**To the arguments for the negative side:**

*To 1.* To that which is objected on the contrary, that they have repentance; it must be said that it is true; but that repentance is a *goad of remorse*, not a *correction of the will*[^p1037-2]; hence if liberty of sinning were given, such that complete impunity were hoped for, I say that they would sin; but if they were to be punished in the same way for the other things they would do as for those which they have done, they would never will to sin.

*To 5.* To that which is asked, whether they have any actual disorder of the will; it can be said that they do; but that disorder has been turned into punishment for them, as for the Blessed a good will [is turned] into glory; hence just as the latter do not merit further by a good will, so neither do the former demerit by an evil one; and this Augustine says, and it is had in the text[^p1037-3].

la: Cap. 3. n. 38, ubi Fulgentius ait: *Sicut nullam ulterius habebunt requiem, sic bonam* etc. Cfr. hic litt. Magistri, c. 1.

en: Ch. 3, n. 38, where Fulgentius says: *Just as they shall have no further rest, so a good* etc. Cf. here the Master's text, ch. 1.

la: Vide Damasc., II. de Fide orthod. c. 4, ex quo II. Sent. d. 7. p. 1. a. 1. q. 1. sumtum est fundam. 1. — Inferius post *peccasse* a cod. aa allegatur *Psalmus* [73, 23.]: *Superbia eorum qui te oderunt, ascendit semper.*

en: See Damascene, II *On the Orthodox Faith* c. 4, from which, in II *Sent.* d. 7, p. 1, a. 1, q. 1, the 1st ground is taken. — Below, after *peccasse*, codex aa adduces the *Psalm* [73, 23]: *The pride of them that hate thee ascendeth continually.*

la: Cod. aa addit *Sapientiae octavo* [v. 21.]: *Non possem esse continens* etc. Cfr. tom. II. pag. 689, nota 4.

en: Codex aa adds *Wisdom, chapter eight* [v. 21]: *I could not be continent* etc. Cf. vol. II, p. 689, note 4.

la: Vers. 3: *Dicentes intra se* etc. — In fine arg. edd. cum uno alteroque codd. vocibus *non peccasse* praemittunt *se*.

en: Verse 3: *Saying within themselves* etc. — At the end of the argument the editions, with one or another of the codices, prefix *se* to the words *non peccasse*.

la: Quaest. 36. n. 1: *Videmus etiam, immanissimas bestias a maximis voluptatibus absterreri dolorum metu.*

en: Question 36, n. 1: *We see also that the most monstrous beasts are frightened away from the greatest pleasures by the fear of pains.*

la: August., XXII. contra Faustum, c. 28: *Si enim nihil delectaret illicitum, nemo peccaret.* Serm. 21. (alias 5. ex Sirmondianis) n. 3: *Non ipsum peccatum amas, sed male amando quod amas illaquearis peccato.* Qua ratione malum possit intendi, explicatur II. Sent. d. 34. a. 1. q. 3. — Pro *quia peccatum* cod. bb *propter se*; cod. U legit glossando: *placebat* [codd. A L Y supplent *eis*] *nisi propter libidinosam delectationem* [cod. Z *voluntatem*].

en: Augustine, XXII *Against Faustus*, c. 28: *For if nothing unlawful gave delight, no one would sin.* Sermon 21 (elsewhere 5, from the Sirmondian collection) n. 3: *You do not love sin itself, but by loving badly what you love you are ensnared by sin.* In what way evil can be intensified is explained in II *Sent.* d. 34, a. 1, q. 3. — For *quia peccatum* codex bb has *propter se*; codex U reads with a gloss: *placebat* [codices A L Y supply *eis*] *nisi propter libidinosam delectationem* [codex Z *voluntatem*].

la: Edd. *videtur*.

en: The editions read *videtur*.

la: Vide supra pag. 932, nota 1. et pag. 959, nota 7.

en: See above p. 932, note 1, and p. 959, note 7.

la: Pro *diligant*, quod ex codd. L Y supplevimus, in cod. E secunda manus substituit *velint*. Post *constat* codd. E L addunt *enim*.

en: For *diligant*, which we have supplied from codices L Y, a second hand in codex E substituted *velint*. After *constat* codices E L add *enim*.

la: Cfr. tom. III. pag. 755, nota 3. — Pro *in peccatoribus*, quod praebet cod. bb, alii codd. et ed. 1 minus congrue *in damnatis*, Vat. *in viatoribus*, quae etiam pro *actus et habitus* substituit *uno modo actu, alio modo habitu*. Inferius pro *speraretur* multi codd. et ed. 1 vel *separetur*, vel *separaretur* (idem recurrit infra in solut. ad 1. pro parte negat.).

en: Cf. vol. III, p. 755, note 3. — For *in peccatoribus*, which codex bb offers, the other codices and ed. 1 have, less fittingly, *in damnatis*, the Vatican edition *in viatoribus*, which also substitutes for *actus et habitus* the words *uno modo actu, alio modo habitu*. Below, for *speraretur*, many codices and ed. 1 have either *separetur* or *separaretur* (the same recurs below in the reply to 1 for the negative side).

la: Vide II. Sent. d. 7. p. 1. a. 1. q. 1. — Pro *eis displicet* multi codd. *displiceat*. Superius pro *ex hoc, quod* codd. I K et ed. 1 omittunt, codd. L Y *exinde*, cod. N *inde*.

en: See II *Sent.* d. 7, p. 1, a. 1, q. 1. — For *eis displicet* many codices have *displiceat*. Above, in place of *ex hoc, quod*, codices I K and ed. 1 omit it, codices L Y have *exinde*, codex N *inde*.

la: Vat. *vertibilitate*. Mox pro *fit* nonnulli codd. et ed. 1 *sit*.

en: The Vatican edition reads *vertibilitate*. Shortly after, for *fit*, some codices and ed. 1 have *sit*.

la: Cfr. Aristot., II. de Generat. animalium, c. 5. — Cod. L voci *laesivum* praemittit *naturae*, cod. K (I a secunda manu) legit: *quia laesivum vel naturae laesivum, et tale est sine gratia naturae superaddita, sicut aliquis* etc. Superius post *distinguendum est*, codd. E I K prosequuntur *et dicendum, quod aut* etc., alii codd. *dicendum, quod aut* etc. Inferius pro *naturam puram*, quod habent codd. G I K S aa, in aliis et edd. *naturam punitam*.

en: Cf. Aristotle, II *On the Generation of Animals*, c. 5. — Codex L prefixes *naturae* to the word *laesivum*; codex K (and I by a second hand) reads: *quia laesivum vel naturae laesivum, et tale est sine gratia naturae superaddita, sicut aliquis* etc. Above, after *distinguendum est*, codices E I K continue *et dicendum, quod aut* etc., other codices *dicendum, quod aut* etc. Below, for *naturam puram*, which codices G I K S aa have, in the others and in the editions there is *naturam punitam*.

la: Ita Fulgentius; cfr. hic lit. Magistri, c. 1.

en: So Fulgentius; cf. here the Master's text, ch. 1.

la: Hic c. 1.

latin_scholion:
**I.** Quod damnatos non poeniteat de peccato *per se*, sive quatenus est culpa, sed tantum *per accidens*, quatenus pro eo poenam patiuntur, cum Ss. Bonav., Thoma atque Scoto communiter docetur.

De 1. quaestione: Scot., hic q. 2. n. 14. seq. — S. Thom., hic q. 2. a. 1. quaestiunc. 2; Suppl. q. 98. a. 2. — Petr. a Tar., hic q. 3. a. 2. — Richard. a Med., II. Sent. d. 7. a. 1. q. 1. — Dionys. Carth., hic q. 4.

**II.** Conclusio 2. quaestionis, quatenus est de *facto*, quod scilicet damnati mallent non esse, est communis. Utrum autem *secundum rectam rationem* propter *malum poenae* possint velle, ut non sint; hoc cum S. Bonav., Richardo (hic a. 4. q. 2.) et Durando (hic q. 2.) etiam Scotus (hic q. 2. n. 7.) negat; sed non approbat priorum duorum rationes aliasque affert. Deinde statuit, ob *malum culpae* posse voluntatem recte ferri in *non-esse permissive*, non tamen ita, ut sit sibi *causa* non essendi. — S. Thom. (locis citt. quaestiunc. sive a. 3.) dicit, quod «damnati possunt praeeligere non esse secundum voluntatem *deliberativam*».

De 2. quaestione praeter laudatos: Petr. a Tar., loc. cit. a. 3. — Dionys. Carth., hic q. 1.

**III.** Conclusio generalis quaestionis 3. communiter tenetur, sicut etiam exceptio qualiscumque, quae notatur in solut. ad 1. 2.

De 3. quaestione: S. Thom., locis citt. quaestiunc. sive art. 4. — Richard. a Med. rem breviter tangit hic a. 3. q. 3. — Dionys. Carth., hic q. 4.

---

english_scholion:
**I.** That the damned do not repent of sin *per se*, that is, insofar as it is fault, but only *per accidens*, insofar as they suffer punishment for it, is commonly taught, together with Ss. Bonaventure, Thomas and Scotus.

On question 1: Scotus, here q. 2, n. 14 f. — St. Thomas, here q. 2, a. 1, quaestiuncula 2; *Supplement* q. 98, a. 2. — Peter of Tarantasia, here q. 3, a. 2. — Richard of Middleton, II *Sent.* d. 7, a. 1, q. 1. — Denis the Carthusian, here q. 4.

**II.** The conclusion of the 2nd question, insofar as it concerns the *fact* — namely that the damned would prefer not to be — is the common one. But whether *according to right reason*, on account of the *evil of punishment*, they can will that they not be: this Scotus too (here q. 2, n. 7), with St. Bonaventure, Richard (here a. 4, q. 2) and Durandus (here q. 2), denies; but he does not approve the reasons of the first two, and brings forward others. He then lays down that, on account of the *evil of fault*, the will can rightly be borne toward *non-being permissively*, yet not so as to be for itself the *cause* of not being. — St. Thomas (in the places cited, quaestiuncula or a. 3) says that "the damned can prefer not to be according to the *deliberative* will."

On question 2, besides those already praised: Peter of Tarantasia, loc. cit. a. 3. — Denis the Carthusian, here q. 1.

**III.** The general conclusion of question 3 is commonly held, as is also whatever exception is noted in the reply to 1 and 2.

On question 3: St. Thomas, in the places cited, quaestiuncula or art. 4. — Richard of Middleton touches the matter briefly here, a. 3, q. 3. — Denis the Carthusian, here q. 4.

---

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** Latin re-set from `raw/bonaventure_vol4_raw.txt` L110284–110494, reflowed column-by-column and verified throughout against the 450 dpi column bands `/tmp/colcrop/vol4-p10{35,36,37}-{L,R}-{0,1,2}.png` (measured gutters 1035:1570, 1036:2049, 1037:1662). **No bands were regenerated.** No band appeared clipped, including the two narrow-run pages (1035, 1037) and p.1035's manual-override gutter.

**Page span.** `printed_pages: [1035, 1036, 1037]` **confirmed correct** — no change. p.1035 from the `ARTICULUS I.` header down; all of p.1036; p.1037 down to the end of the `SCHOLION.` (which prints full-width across the gutter), immediately before the full-width `QUAESTIO II.` header (raw L110495).

**Title.** The line after the `QUAESTIO I.` header on p.1035 reads *Utrum damnati velint, se peccasse.* — the skeleton's `title_la` **agrees**; no correction needed. (The TRACTATIO paraphrase at L110274 also agrees.)

**Article opener / question count.** Article I prints no separate praenotata; the article's promise sits in the divisio's TRACTATIO: **`Circa primum quaeruntur tria`** (p.1035-L, verified on band). The three ordinal openers — *Primo quaeritur, utrum damnati velint, se peccasse* / *Secundo, utrum voluntate deliberativa damnati malint non esse quam esse sic* / *Tertio, utrum damnati mallent, omnes esse damnatos, quam quosdam damnatos, quosdam beatos* — are all present on p.1035-R and match `p1-a1-q{1,2,3}`. **No hidden question.** The article's own opener sentence (*Quantum ergo ad primum proceditur sic…*) is folded into this q1 and is not dropped at the header↔QUAESTIO seam.

**Seam with `p1-divisio` (derived independently, not taken on hand-off).** The divisio's material — `COMMENTARIUS IN DISTINCTIONEM L.`, `Pars I.`, *De statu damnatorum post iudicium*, *Hic oritur quaestio…*, `DIVISIO TEXTUS`, `TRACTATIO QUAESTIONUM` — runs to `Circa primum quaeruntur tria.` / `…quosdam beatos.` This chunk opens at the `ARTICULUS I.` header (L110284). Verified on the p.1035 bands; the seam is clean and grammatically closed on both sides.

**Page → apparatus split map (15 entries in this file).**

- **p.1035 — TWO registers.** The **left** footer register (notes 1–2: *Loc. cit. cum Glossa interlineari; deinde Ps. 57, 11.* / *Isai. 6, 1. seqq.*) belongs to the **littera / divisio** material above and is **NOT** claimed here. The **right** register, headed `NOTAE AD COMMENTARIUM.`, holds a single note 1, which this body anchors → rendered as `p1035c-1`. **1 entry mine.**
- **p.1036 — one register, 11 notes, split across the gutter.** Left footer = notes 1–5; right footer = an **unnumbered continuation** of note 5 (`[codd. A L Y supplent eis] nisi propter libidinosam delectationem [cod. Z voluntatem]`), then notes 6–11. Note that notes 6–8 anchor in the **left** body column but print in the **right** footer — the register does not split at the body-column boundary. All 11 are anchored by this body; the continuation is rendered joined to its parent note 5. **11 entries mine.**
- **p.1037 — one register, 7 notes, split across the gutter.** Left footer = notes 1–4 (note 4 running long); right footer = the unnumbered tail of note 4, then notes 5–7. **Notes 1–3 are mine** (anchors *amittit visum*, *correctio voluntatis*, *in littera*). **3 entries mine.**

**Head/tail runover check, per page.**

- **p.1035** — *Head:* both registers open with a numbered note 1; no unnumbered fragment from p.1034. *Tail:* the left register's note 2 ends complete (`…et ed. 1 sufficit.`); the `NOTAE AD COMMENTARIUM` register's note 1 ends complete (`…hic litt. Magistri, c. 1.`). **No runover either way.**
- **p.1036** — *Head:* left footer opens at a numbered note 1; nothing carried in from p.1035. *Tail:* note 11 ends complete (`…nonnulli codd. et ed. 1 sit.`); nothing carried onto p.1037. The only continuation is **internal to the page**, across the gutter (note 5), and is rendered here.
- **p.1037** — *Head:* left footer opens at a numbered note 1; **confirms** p.1036 carried nothing over. *Tail:* **note 7 breaks off mid-sentence** (`…Nam si beatus esses, utique esse quam`) and runs onto p.1038's footer. Note 7 is q2's, not mine.

**Hand-offs forwarded to `p1-a1-q2`.** (a) p.1037 footer **notes 4–7** are yours, not mine — note 4 itself splits across the p.1037 gutter (left half ends `…et: Melius erat`, right half opens `ei, si natus non fuisset homo ille…`); render both halves joined or the second is lost. (b) **p.1037 note 7 breaks off mid-sentence and continues at the head of p.1038's footer** as an unnumbered fragment — check for it. (c) q2's body begins on p.1037 (full-width `QUAESTIO II.` header, then *Secundo quaeritur…* in both columns), so **p.1037 is shared** and its printed_pages should include 1037.

**Hand-offs picked up.** None trusted; the p.1035 seam with `p1-divisio` and the p.1035 left-register ownership were both derived here from the bands.

**Band-vs-OCR disagreements resolved at band time** (band authoritative, per the Vol II/IV override; none left as `[?]`):

- Reply numeral in the negative-part solutions: the raw OCR reads `0. Ad illud quod quaeritur…`; the band prints **`5.`** — and the content (*inordinationem actualem voluntatis*) matches negative-side argument 5. Rendered `Ad 5.`
- p.1036 note 7: raw reads `pag. 939, nota 7`; the band reads **`pag. 959, nota 7`**.
- Scholion I closing citation: raw reads `Dionys. Carth., hic q. i.`; the band reads **`hic q. 4.`**
- Scholion III: raw reads `quaestiunc. sive art. i.` and a closing `hic q. i.`; the band reads **`art. 4.`** and **`hic q. 4.`** (Scholion II's closing `Dionys. Carth., hic q. 1.` really is a 1 on the band.)
- Scholion II: raw reads `Scotus-(hic q. 2. n. 7.)`; the band shows an ordinary `Scotus (hic q. 2. n. 7.)`.
- p.1035 note 1 of the **littera** register reads `Ps. 57, 11` on the band (raw: `Ps. 87, 11`) — recorded here for the littera chunk's owner, not rendered in this file.

**Marginalia trimmed** (editorial side-glosses, not body text): *Arg. pro parte affirmativa* · *Pro parte negativa* · *Distinctio* · *De timore servili* · *Conclusio* (×2) · *Ad argg. pro parte affirm.* · *Notandum* · *Ad argg. pro parte negat.* · *Fundamenta* (p.1037, q2's).

**Structural notes.** The `SCHOLION.` header prints **centred full-width across the gutter** on p.1037, between this question's last reply and `QUAESTIO II.` — the lost-question signature's typography, but here it hides nothing. Per the corpus convention it is Article I's scholion (it treats questions 1, 2 and 3) and is placed **last** in both the `## Latin` and `## English` blocks, after the body, so the parser reads a non-empty body. The p.1037 running head reads `DIST. L. P. I. ART. I. QUAEST. II.` while the top of the page is still Quaestio I — page furniture describing where the page ends, not a section marker.

**Ambiguity flags:** none.

**Anchor count:** Latin body 15 · English body 15 · apparatus definitions 15 — all matched.


site: bonaventure

collection: Book IV: On the Sacraments

title: Dist. 50, Part 1, Art. 1, Q. 2

author: St. Bonaventure

languages: en la

title: Opera Omnia (Quaracchi critical edition)

publisher: Collegii S. Bonaventurae

source_text:
<!-- page 1037 -->

### Quaestio II. *Utrum voluntate deliberativa damnati malint non esse quam sic esse.*

Secundo quaeritur, utrum voluntate deliberativa damnati malint non esse quam sic esse. Et quod sic, videtur.

1. Apocalypsis nono[^p1037-4]: *In diebus illis desiderabunt homines mori, et fugiet mors ab eis.*

2. Item, Augustinus in libro de Miseria huius mundi[^p1037-5], loquens de damnatis, dicit: «O mors, quam dulcis esses quibus tam amara fuisti! Te solum desiderant qui te vehementer oderunt».

3. Item, *ratione* videtur: quia maior est *tristitia ex poena*, quam sit *delectatio ex esse*, quia modicum habent gaudium et magnam tristitiam: ergo si electio rationis[^p1037-6] praeeligit *fugam* magis nocivi *desiderio* minus delectabilis, ut patet de illo qui vult lucrari argentum et fugit mortem; videtur, quod damnati malint omnino non puniri quam esse.

4. Item, si cederent in *non-esse*, poena esset momentanea; sed poena cruciatus eorum est aeterna: ergo si poena momentanea praeferenda est aeternae, sicut malum finitum infinito; videtur etc.

**Contra:** 1. Augustinus, in libro de Libero Arbitrio[^p1037-7]: «Considera, quam bonum est *esse*, quod et beati et miseri volunt; magis tamen est *esse* et *esse miserum* quam omnino *non esse*, cum tamen miser esse nolis».

<!-- page 1038 -->

2. Item, *ratio* Augustini[^p1038-1]: praeelectio supponit electionem; sed *non esse* non est eligibile, quia omne eligibile habet apparentiam boni, sed ipsum *non esse* non habet boni apparentiam, quia quod apparet *bonum* apparet *esse*: ergo etc.

3. Item, omnis appetitus ordinatus est conformis naturae, quia «natura appetit semper quod melius est»; sed «natura semper appetit *esse*, ut ipse Philosophus[^p1038-2] dicit, et nullo modo *non-esse*»: ergo etc.

4. Item, maius malum magis est fugiendum; sed maius malum est quod magis adimit; sed corruptio in *non-esse* adimit totum bonum, poena vero non totum, immo multum relinquit[^p1038-3]: ergo magis fugiendum est *non-esse* quam *puniri*.

### Conclusio

> *Damnati mallent non esse quam esse damnati; et illud appetitu commodi magis appetendum est, non tamen simpliciter.*

**Respondeo:** Ad hoc dicunt aliqui, quod damnati mallent *non esse* quam *sic esse*; sed appetitus eorum est inordinatus et indiscretus et phantasticus, quia sibi nocivum appetit, sicut est appetitus febricitantis, qui non venit ex natura, sed ex phantastica imaginatione, quia existimat sibi prodesse quod nocet sibi. Sic damnati, quia existimant, se habere quietem, si omnino non essent, appetunt magis *non esse* quam *esse in poenis*; et hoc videtur dicere Augustinus. — Sed tamen Sapiens dicit in Ecclesiastis quarto[^p1038-4]: *Feliciorem utroque iudicavi* etc.; et ipsa Sapientia, Matthaei vigesimo sexto: *Melius erat ei, si natus non fuisset homo ille*; et Hieronymus dicit: «Quod melius est non vivere quam male vivere».

Ideo dicendum aliter, quod *non esse* nullo modo est appetendum appetitu *recto*[^p1038-5]; similiter nec *esse damnatum*, vel *esse infelicem*; et si horum aliquid appetatur, phantasia est, non ordinatio naturae; sed utrumque horum *fugiendum*. Et cum se habeant sicut excedentia et excessa, *utrumque* altero *magis fugiendum* diversis considerationibus.

Quia enim *non esse* adimit totum bonum, *poena* partem, ideo *hoc* magis fugiendum[^p1038-6], *simpliciter* tamen loquendo. — Quia *corruptio* in *non-esse* in infinitum excedit *intensive*, in infinitum, inquam, secundum *proportionem*, *poena* vero *extensive* in infinitum secundum *veritatem*; ideo credo, quod magis appetendum esset, si poneretur in optione, omnino *non esse* quam *aeternaliter torqueri*, loquor de appetitu, qui *refugit incommodum*. Hoc enim iudicat mens mea magis portabile, sicut decollationem magis quam diuturnam ignis adustionem. Verumtamen secundum *appetitum honesti*, quia cruciatus iniqui spiritus est ad gloriam Dei, utique malle deberet ignibus subiacere ad continuam Dei laudem, quam per omnimodam corruptionem manum Dei effugere[^p1038-7].

Concedo igitur, quod damnati mallent non esse; et omnis homo ratione illud debet appetere, considerata gravitate utriusque poenae; non tamen dico, quod sit magis appetendum *simpliciter*, tamen ipsi simpliciter magis appetunt. — Et concedendae sunt rationes ad hoc.

1. Ad rationes autem ad oppositum, solvendum[^p1038-8], quod Augustinus procedit ea via, qua corruptio in *non-esse* excedit, scilicet *intensive*.

2. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod praeelectio supponit electionem; dicendum, quod verum est de illa quae est per modum *desiderii*, non de ea quae est per modum *fugae*.

<!-- page 1039 -->

3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod natura desiderat semper esse; dicendum, quod verum est, et etiam ratio recta; tamen natura magis refugit poenam aeternam quam momentaneam.

4. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod maius malum est, quod magis adimit; dicendum, quod *maius malum* dupliciter est, scilicet *extensive* et *intensive*, et similiter *magis adimere*; et natura magis refugit semper esse in omnimoda miseria quam omni bono privari; sicut frequenter de re, quam multum amamus, maluimus[^p1039-1] illam non habere, quam propter illam induere conditionem servilem[^p1039-2].

> **De numeratione notarum.** Quaracchi restarts its footnote numbering on every printed page. The apparatus below is therefore keyed by page: notes 4–7 of page 1037, notes 1–8 of page 1038, and notes 1–2 of page 1039. Notes 1–3 of page 1037 anchor in the preceding question (Quaestio I) and are rendered there; notes 3–8 of page 1039 anchor in the following question (Quaestio III).

---

english:
### Question II. *Whether by deliberative will the damned would rather not be than be thus.*

Secondly it is asked whether by deliberative will the damned would rather not be than be thus. And that they would, seems the case.

1. Apocalypse nine[^p1037-4]: *In those days men shall desire to die, and death shall flee from them.*

2. Likewise, Augustine in the book *On the Misery of This World*[^p1037-5], speaking of the damned, says: «O death, how sweet you would be to those to whom you were so bitter! You alone are desired by those who vehemently hated you».

3. Likewise, it seems so *by reason*: because the *sorrow from punishment* is greater than the *delight from being* is, since they have little joy and great sorrow: therefore, if the choice of reason[^p1037-6] prefers the *flight* from what is more harmful to the *desire* of what is less delightful — as is plain in the case of the man who wants to gain silver and yet flees death — it seems that the damned would rather not be punished at all than be.

4. Likewise, if they were to pass into *non-being*, the punishment would be momentary; but the punishment of their torment is eternal: therefore, if a momentary punishment is to be preferred to an eternal one, as a finite evil to an infinite one; it seems etc.

**On the contrary:** 1. Augustine, in the book *On Free Choice*[^p1037-7]: «Consider how great a good *being* is, which both the blessed and the wretched will; yet it is more to *be* and *to be wretched* than not to be at all, although you would not will to be wretched».

2. Likewise, the *reasoning* of Augustine[^p1038-1]: pre-election presupposes election; but *not-being* is not eligible, because everything eligible has the appearance of a good, whereas *not-being* itself does not have the appearance of a good, since what appears *good* appears *to be*: therefore etc.

3. Likewise, every ordered appetite is conformed to nature, because «nature always seeks what is better»; but «nature always seeks *to be*, as the Philosopher[^p1038-2] himself says, and in no way *not-being*»: therefore etc.

4. Likewise, a greater evil is more to be fled; but the greater evil is that which takes away more; but corruption into *non-being* takes away the whole good, whereas punishment does not take away the whole, but rather leaves much[^p1038-3]: therefore *non-being* is more to be fled than *being punished*.

### Conclusio

> *The damned would rather not be than be damned; and that is more to be sought by the appetite for the advantageous, yet not without qualification.*

**I respond:** To this some say that the damned would rather *not be* than *be thus*; but their appetite is disordered and undiscerning and fantastical, because it seeks what is harmful to itself, as is the appetite of a man in fever, which does not come from nature but from a fantastical imagining, since he judges that what harms him is of benefit to him. So the damned, because they judge that they would have rest if they were not at all, seek *not to be* rather than *to be in punishments*; and this Augustine seems to say. — Yet nevertheless the Wise Man says in Ecclesiastes four[^p1038-4]: *And I judged him happier than both* etc.; and Wisdom itself, Matthew twenty-six: *It were better for him, if that man had not been born*; and Jerome says: «That it is better not to live than to live badly».

Therefore it must be said otherwise, that *not-being* is in no way to be sought by a *right*[^p1038-5] appetite; likewise neither *to be damned*, nor *to be unhappy*; and if any of these is sought, it is fantasy, not the ordination of nature; but both of them are *to be fled*. And since they stand to one another as exceeding and exceeded, *each* is *more to be fled* than the other under different considerations.

For because *not-being* takes away the whole good, and *punishment* a part, therefore *this* is more to be fled[^p1038-6] — speaking, however, *without qualification*. — Because *corruption* into *non-being* exceeds infinitely *intensively*, infinitely, I say, according to *proportion*, whereas *punishment* exceeds *extensively* infinitely according to *truth*; therefore I believe that it would be more to be sought, if it were set before one as a choice, not to be at all rather than *to be tormented eternally* — I speak of the appetite which *flees what is disadvantageous*. For my mind judges this the more bearable, as beheading rather than the long burning of fire. Nevertheless, according to the *appetite for the honourable*, since the torment of a wicked spirit is unto the glory of God, one ought assuredly to prefer to lie under the fires unto the continual praise of God rather than to escape the hand of God through utter corruption[^p1038-7].

I concede, therefore, that the damned would rather not be; and every man by reason ought to seek that, the gravity of each punishment being considered; yet I do not say that it is more to be sought *without qualification*, although they themselves without qualification do seek it more. — And the reasons for this are to be conceded.

1. To the reasons for the opposite, however, it must be resolved[^p1038-8] that Augustine proceeds by that way in which corruption into *non-being* exceeds, namely *intensively*.

2. To that which is objected, that pre-election presupposes election; it must be said that this is true of the election which is by way of *desire*, not of that which is by way of *flight*.

3. To that which is objected, that nature always desires to be; it must be said that this is true, and right reason too; yet nature more flees an eternal punishment than a momentary one.

4. To that which is objected, that the greater evil is that which takes away more; it must be said that *a greater evil* is such in two ways, namely *extensively* and *intensively*, and likewise *to take away more*; and nature more flees always to be in utter misery than to be deprived of every good; as often, concerning a thing we love much, we have preferred[^p1039-1] not to have it rather than to put on a servile condition on its account[^p1039-2].

---

la: Vers. 6: Et in diebus illis quaerent homines mortem et non invenient eam et desiderabunt mori etc. — Cod. S huic arg. subiungit aliud petitum ex Hieron. in Ierem. 20, 15: *Maledictus vir, qui annuntiavit patri meo dicens: natus est tibi puer masculus.* Nos secundum illud Iob [3, 3.]: *Pereat dies, in qua natus sum,* hoc testimonium exponimus, ut scilicet melius sit nunquam esse quam in suppliciis male vivere; unde *mors viro requies, cui clausit Deus viam suam* [Eccli. 22, 11.], et: *Quare data est misero lux* [Iob 3, 20.]? et: *Melius erat ei, si natus non fuisset homo ille* [Matth. 26, 24.], non quod sit qui natus non fuerit, sed quod melius sit non esse quam male esse.

en: Verse 6: And in those days men shall seek death and shall not find it, and they shall desire to die etc. — Codex S appends to this argument another taken from Jerome on Jeremiah 20, 15: *Cursed be the man who announced to my father, saying: a male child is born to you.* We expound this testimony in accordance with that saying of Job [3, 3]: *Let the day perish wherein I was born* — namely, that it is better never to be than to live badly amid torments; whence *death is rest to the man whose way is hidden by God* [Ecclus. 22, 11], and: *Why is light given to him that is in misery* [Job 3, 20]? and: *It were better for him, if that man had not been born* [Matt. 26, 24] — not that there is someone who has not been born, but that it is better not to be than to be badly.

la: Inter opera August. liber sub hoc titulo non occurrit. Innocent. III. composuit opus, quod inscribitur: *De Contemptu mundi sive de miseria conditionis humanae*, in cuius libro tertio (de miseria humanae conditionis), c. 9. dicitur: «O mors, quam dulcis esses quibus tam amara fuisti! Te solam desideranter optabunt qui te solam vehementer abhorruerunt». Sub nomine *Augustini* olim exhibebatur opusculum sub titulo: *Liber meditationum* (sive liber secundus Soliloquiorum ad Deum), quod incipit: Eia nunc homuncio! fuge paululum occupationes tuas etc. (in ed. operum August. *Maurin.* non exstat), in cuius c. 37. eadem sententia prolata esse dicitur. — Pro *dulcis esses* plures codd. *dulcis es*.

en: Among the works of Augustine no book under this title occurs. Innocent III composed a work entitled *On Contempt of the World, or on the Misery of the Human Condition*, in whose third book (on the misery of the human condition), c. 9, it is said: «O death, how sweet you would be to those to whom you were so bitter! You alone will they long for with desire who alone vehemently abhorred you». Under the name of *Augustine* there was formerly circulated a little work under the title *Book of Meditations* (or the second book of the *Soliloquies to God*), which begins: «Come now, little man! flee a while your occupations» etc. (it does not exist in the *Maurist* edition of Augustine's works), in whose c. 37 the same sentence is said to have been uttered. — For *dulcis esses* several codices read *dulcis es*.

la: Ita codd. A G aa, alii codd. et edd. *tortoris*. Finem arg. Vat. exhibet sic: *omnino non esse quam sic puniri*.

en: So codices A G aa; other codices and the editions read *tortoris*. The Vatican edition gives the end of the argument thus: *not to be at all rather than to be punished thus*.

la: Libr. III. c. 7. n. 20: Cave potius, ne hic erres, ubi te videre verum putas. Nam si beatus esses, utique esse quam non esse malles; et nunc miser cum sis, mavis tamen esse vel miser quam omnino non esse, cum esse nolis miser. Considera igitur, quantum potes, quam magnum bonum sit ipsum esse, quod et beati et miseri volunt. Nam si hoc bene consideraveris, videbis, te in tantum esse miserum, in quantum non propinquas ei quod summe est; in tantum autem putare melius esse, ut quisque non sit, quam ut miser sit, in quantum non vides quod summe est; et ideo tamen te esse velle, quoniam ab illo es, qui summe est.

en: Book III, c. 7, n. 20: Beware rather lest you err here, where you think you see the truth. For if you were blessed, you would assuredly prefer to be rather than not to be; and now, wretched as you are, you still prefer to be, even wretched, rather than not to be at all, although you would not will to be wretched. Consider therefore, as far as you can, how great a good being itself is, which both the blessed and the wretched will. For if you consider this well, you will see that you are wretched precisely in so far as you do not draw near to that which supremely is; and that you think it better for anyone not to be than to be wretched precisely in so far as you do not see that which supremely is; and that nevertheless you will yourself to be, because you are from him who supremely is.

la: Libr. III. de Lib. Arb. c. 8. n. 22: Nam illud vide quam absurde et inconvenienter dicatur: mallem non esse quam miser esse. Qui enim dicit: *mallem* hoc quam illud, *eligit* aliquid. *Non-esse* autem non est aliquid, sed nihil; et ideo nullo pacto potes recte eligere, quando quod eligas non est... quod autem non est, melius esse non potest; non ergo id velle debuisti... Deinde, quod quisque recte eligit appetendum, cum ad id pervenerit, necesse est melior fiat; melior autem esse non poterit qui non erit: nemo igitur recte potest eligere, ut non sit.

en: Book III of *On Free Choice*, c. 8, n. 22: For see how absurdly and unfittingly it is said: I would rather not be than be wretched. For he who says *I would rather* this than that, *chooses* something. But *not-being* is not something, but nothing; and therefore in no way can you rightly choose, when what you would choose is not... and what is not cannot be better; therefore you ought not to have willed it... Further, when anyone rightly chooses something as to be sought, once he has attained it he must necessarily become better; but he who will not be cannot be better: no one, therefore, can rightly choose not to be.

la: Libr. II. de Generat. et corrupt. text. 59. (c. 10.): Quoniam enim in omnibus inquimus quod melius est desiderare naturam semper; melius autem esse quam non esse.

en: Book II of *On Generation and Corruption*, text 59 (c. 10): For in all things we say that nature always desires what is better; and it is better to be than not to be.

la: August., XIX. de Civ. Dei, c. 13. n. 2: Neque enim [Deus puniendo] totum aufert, quod naturae dedit; sed aliquid adimit, aliquid relinquit, ut sit qui doleat quod adimit. Et ipse dolor testimonium est boni adempti et boni relicti; nisi enim bonum relictum esset, bonum amissum dolere non posset.

en: Augustine, *City of God* XIX, c. 13, n. 2: For neither does [God, in punishing] take away the whole of what he gave to nature; but he takes away something and leaves something, so that there may be one who grieves at what he takes away. And the grief itself is a testimony both to the good taken away and to the good left behind; for unless a good had been left, the good lost could not be grieved for.

la: Vers. 3: Et feliciorem utroque iudicavi qui necdum natus est nec vidit mala, quae sub sole fiunt. — Seq. locus est Matth. 26, 24: Bonum erat ei etc.; in quem loc. ait Hieron.: Sed simpliciter dictum est, multo melius esse non subsistere quam male subsistere. Cfr. supra pag. 1037, nota 3.

en: Verse 3: And I judged him happier than both, who is not yet born, nor has seen the evils that are done under the sun. — The following passage is Matt. 26, 24: It were better for him etc.; on which passage Jerome says: But it is said without qualification that it is far better not to subsist than to subsist badly. Compare above, p. 1037, note 3.

la: Edd. *ordinato et recto*. Inferius pro *phantasia est* edd. *phantasticus est appetitus*.

en: The editions read *ordinato et recto*. Below, for *phantasia est* the editions read *phantasticus est appetitus*.

la: In cod. R additur Glossa non respondens verbis seqq.: *quia vero poena diuturnior, quia aeterna, sed ipsa conversio in non-esse est momentanea; ideo hoc magis fugiendum*. Inferius post *excedit* edd. addunt *poenam*.

en: In codex R a gloss is added which does not correspond to the words that follow: *but because the punishment is longer-lasting, since it is eternal, whereas the conversion into non-being is itself momentary; therefore this is more to be fled*. Below, after *excedit*, the editions add *poenam*.

la: Respicitur Tob. 13, 2: Et non est qui effugiat manum tuam. Cfr. Sap. 16, 15. — De duplici appetitu *commodi* et *honesti* cfr. supra pag. 1003, nota 6. — Inferius post *non esse* cod. F supplet *quam esse*. Subinde voci *ratione*, quod cod. Z omittit, et pro quo edd. *recte*, codd. A L addunt *utens*.

en: Reference is made to Tobit 13, 2: And there is none that can escape your hand. Compare Wisdom 16, 15. — On the twofold appetite for the *advantageous* and the *honourable* compare above, p. 1003, note 6. — Below, after *non esse*, codex F supplies *quam esse*. Thereafter, to the word *ratione*, which codex Z omits and for which the editions read *recte*, codices A L add *utens*.

la: Cod. K (I a secunda manu) *patet solutio*.

en: Codex K (I, by a second hand) reads *patet solutio*.

la: Nonnulli codd. *malumus*, cod. K *mallemus*.

en: Several codices read *malumus*; codex K reads *mallemus*.

la: Vide scholion ad praecedentem quaest.

en: See the scholion on the preceding question. ---

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** Latin re-set from `raw/bonaventure_vol4_raw.txt` L110495–110670, with every body and footer band read at 450 dpi: `/tmp/colcrop/vol4-p10{37,38,39}-{L,R}-{0,1,2}.png` (gutters 1037:1662, 1038:2103, 1039:1615). No bands regenerated. Footer text taken from the bands, not the raw — the raw fragments and mis-orders every register on these three pages.

**Page span.** `printed_pages: [1037, 1038, 1039]` **confirmed correct, no change.** The chunk opens with the `QUAESTIO II.` header set below the Art. I scholion in p.1037's left column, and closes at *…induere conditionem servilem* in p.1037…1039's right column, immediately before the full-width `QUAESTIO III.` header on p.1039.

**Title.** Verified against the line printed *after* the `QUAESTIO II.` header (it runs centred across the gutter: `Utrum voluntate deliberativa damnati` on the L band, `…malint non esse quam sic esse.` on the R band). Agrees with the skeleton's `title_la`; no correction.

**Apparatus page-split map (14 entries).**
- **p.1037 — register of 7 notes total; this chunk claims 4–7.** Notes 1 (*Cfr. Aristot., II. de Generat. animalium*), 2 (*Ita Fulgentius*), 3 (*Hic c. I.*) anchor in `p1-a1-q1`'s body and belong to that chunk. **Binding is not column-uniform here:** the L footer carries notes 1–4 although note 3 anchors in the *right* body column; note 4 anchors in the left body column. Notes 5–7 print in the R footer.
- **p.1038 — register of 8 notes; all 8 are this chunk's.** L footer holds notes 1–2, R footer holds notes 3–8.
- **p.1039 — register of 8 notes; this chunk claims 1–2 only.** Notes 3–8 anchor in `p1-a1-q3` and belong to that chunk. **Again not column-uniform:** notes 1 and 2 print in the *left* footer while both anchor in the *right* body column.

**Head/tail runover check, per page.**
- **p.1037 — head:** clean, the register opens with a numbered note 1. **Tail:** note 7 (*Augustinus, de Libero Arbitrio*, Libr. III c. 7 n. 20) **breaks off mid-sentence** at *…utique esse quam*.
- **p.1038 — head:** carries an **unnumbered fragment** at the top of the left footer (*non esse malles; et nunc miser cum sis…qui summe est.*) which is the completion of p.1037 note 7. It is rendered joined to its parent note, p.1037 note 7, above; it is *not* a note of p.1038. **Tail:** note 8 closes cleanly.
- **p.1039 — head:** clean, opens with a numbered note 1 — confirming p.1038's register did not run over. **Tail:** notes 1–2 are complete; the page's later notes are q3's.

**Seam with `p1-a1-q1` (derived independently from the bands, not from a hand-off).** p.1037's left column carries the end of q1 (*…sed si deberent ita puniri pro aliis, quae*), continuing into the right column (*facerent… et habetur in littera³*), then the Art. I `SCHOLION` (I–III), and only then the `QUAESTIO II.` header. So q1 holds p.1037 notes 1–3; this chunk holds 4–7. **Forwarded to `p1-a1-q3`:** p.1039 notes **3–8** (Seneca *de Consolat. ad Marciam*; Isai. 14 / Glossa ordinaria; August. *de Catechizandis Rudibus* c. 25 n. 48; and the following entries) — p.1039's register is **8 notes, not 2**.

**Scholion.** None in this chunk, as expected: Article I's scholion prints on p.1037 above the `QUAESTIO II.` header and belongs to `p1-a1-q1`. Its section II expressly treats this question (*Conclusio 2. quaestionis…*), and p.1039 note 2 points back to it (*Vide scholion ad praecedentem quaest.*). `has_scholion: false`.

**Narrow-run page 1037.** Read at the measured gutter 1662. All six bands are clean — no clipped glyph at either column edge, including the full-width centred `QUAESTIO II.` title, which splits legibly across the L/R bands. No re-crop needed or performed.

**Running heads.** p.1039's running head reads `DIST. L. P. I. ART. I. QUAEST. III.` on both bands even though the top of the page is still Quaestio II's tail — page furniture reflecting the question that opens on the page, not an error. (The raw OCRs it `QUAEST. IH.`)

**Marginalia.** The printed side-glosses (*Fundamenta.*, *Ad oppositum.*, *Opinio 1.*, *Non probatur.*, *Opinio 2.*, *Conclusio*, *Consideratio 1.*, *Consideratio 2.*, *Conclusio generalis*, *Solutio oppositorum*, *Distinctio.*) are editorial marginalia and are trimmed per the corpus convention; they bleed inline in the raw (*ConcloS'*, *Solutio positoroii*, etc.).

**Anchor counts.** Latin body: 14 anchors. English body: 14 anchors. Apparatus definitions: 14. Matched.

**ambiguity flags.** None. The one raw-vs-band divergence — the raw's `maluimus`/`malumus` in p.1039 note 1 — was resolved at band time: the note reads *Nonnulli codd. malumus, cod. K mallemus*, against a body text of *maluimus*.

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. 50, Part 1, Art. 1, Q. 3

title_alt: Whether the damned would rather that all were damned than that some be damned and some blessed

source_text:
<!-- page 1039 -->

> **Nota de apparatu.** Quaracchi numerat notas suas ab initio cuiusque paginae impressae; quare notae huius capituli duobus ordinibus distinguuntur, scilicet notis 3–9 paginae 1039 et notis 1–6 paginae 1040.

### Quaestio III. *Utrum damnati mallent, omnes esse damnatos, quam quosdam damnatos, quosdam beatos.*

Tertio quaeritur, utrum damnati mallent, omnes esse damnatos, quam quosdam damnatos, quosdam beatos. Et quod mallent omnes damnatos, ostenditur:

1. Primo per illud quod communiter consuevit dici[^p1039-3]: « Solatium est miseris socios habere poenarum ».

2. Item, hoc ostenditur per illud quod dicitur Isaiae decimo quarto[^p1039-4]: *Surrexerunt de soliis;* Glossa: « Solatium est malorum multos socios habere poenarum ».

3. Item, Augustinus, de Catechizandis Rudibus[^p1039-5]: « Cautus esto, ne tibi aliunde hostis subrepat, quia solatium malevolentissimum suae voluntatis cum quibus damnetur inquirit »: ergo illud est solatium malorum: si ergo ipsi quaerunt et desiderant quod est ad solatium, patet etc.

4. Item, *ratione* videtur: quia invidia surgit ex defectu caritatis et amore proprii boni[^p1039-6]; sed utrumque in damnatis est: ergo est in eis maxima invidia: ergo si invidus nullum vellet videre bonum nec beatum: ergo damnati vellent, quod omnes una cum eis essent damnati magis, quam quod quidam essent damnati, quidam beati.

5. Item, Sancti et damnati ad invicem inimici sunt, propter hoc quod damnati sunt inimici Dei: ergo cum damnati non diligant inimicos, sed potius odiant, et qui odit alium mallet ipsum videre miserum quam beatum; ergo etc.

**Contra:** 1. Lucae decimo sexto[^p1039-7] dicitur de divite, quod rogabat pro fratribus, ne venirent *in locum tormentorum:* ergo cum damnati habeant multos consanguineos in caelo, ergo mallent, eos esse in caelo quam in inferno.

2. Item, damnati, etsi habeant malam voluntatem, non tamen perdiderunt affectionem naturalem; quod patet, quia impiissimi homines diligunt sibi proximos; sed in praesenti, si pater miser habet filium miserum, non laetatur, sed magis tristatur de tali societate: ergo similiter in inferno.

3. Item, si damnati desiderarent aliorum damnationem: ergo sicut cresceret aliorum damnatio, ita et consolatio eorum, quia desiderium, si compleatur, delectat animam: ergo post omnium damnationem erunt in maiori consolatione; quod est manifeste falsum, immo crescet desolatio, sicut dicitur super illud Psalmi[^p1039-8]: *Desiderium peccatorum peribit;* Glossa: « Nullo succedente solatio ».

4. Item, Beatus adiectus multitudini electorum multiplicat gaudium[^p1039-9]: ergo *ab oppositis* damnatus amplificat moerorem; sed sicut Beatus desiderat amplificationem sui gaudii, ita damnatus diminutionem sui moeroris: ergo cum Beati semper velint, miseros pervenire ad gloriam, damnati refugiunt, ut aliqui descendant ad eorum miseriam; ergo nollent, Beatos esse damnatos.

### Conclusio

> *Generaliter loquendo, damnati mallent, omnes esse miseros, quam aliquos esse beatos, ipsis existentibus miseris.*

**Respondeo:** Dicendum, quod etsi in damnatis aliquo modo remittantur affectiones libidinosae propter poenarum magnitudinem, illae inquam, affectiones, quae habent annexam delectationem; aliae tamen affectiones, in quibus est poenalitas, vigorantur; unde etsi cesset actualiter affectus luxuriandi et dominandi, tamen intenditur affectus sive furor impatientiae et livor invidiae; unde tunc *dentibus <!-- page 1040 --> suis frement et tabescent*[^p1040-1]. Et quoniam vigebit in eis odium et invidia, et vehementer tristabuntur et tabescent in gloria electorum Dei; et ideo ad satiandum suam impiissimam aemulationem et odium vellent, nullos esse beatos, immo omnes miseros. Et quia nec ipsi ad beatitudinem possunt pertingere nec alios possunt a statu beatitudinis amovere; ideo in semetipsis vehementer tabescunt et confunduntur. — Concedendum est ergo, quod generaliter loquendo mallent, omnes esse miseros, quam, ipsis existentibus miseris, aliquos esse beatos. — Et concedendae sunt rationes ad hoc.

**Ad argumenta pro parte opposita:**

*Ad 1.* Ad illud quod obiicitur de illo divite, qui nolebat, fratres damnari; dicendum, quod quamvis in generali damnati nolint videre beatos aliquos, sed omnes miseros; tamen, quia specialius habent aliquorum amorem naturalem et privatum, nollent, ipsos damnari, aliis existentibus in statu gloriae[^p1040-2]; quia, etsi illi damnentur, adhuc tamen manet aemulatio et occasio tabescendi. Non sic esset de omnibus.

*Ad 2.* Et per hoc patet sequens de affectione naturali; tamen nullos ita diligunt naturaliter, quin vellent, eos esse damnatos, hoc pacto, quod nulli essent beati. Et exemplum patet in illis qui habent odium capitale, qui desiderant vitam consanguineorum; attamen vellent, quod multi ex consanguineis essent mortui, ut possent affectum[^p1040-3] vindictae de inimicis suis implere.

*Ad 3.* Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod si desiderant damnationem etc.; dicendum, quod non desiderant damnationem quorumcumque, sed[^p1040-4] eorum quibus *invident,* propterea quia vident eos elevatos, et illorum, ex quorum *comparatione confunduntur,* et isti sunt Beati; et quia hoc obtinere non possunt, ideo non consequuntur inde solatium, sed habent inde magnum supplicium.

*Ad 4.* Ad illud[^p1040-5], quod refugiunt desolationem; dicendum, quod sicut homo sanus, in quo est natura bene disposita, appetit cibaria sibi competentia; homo vero infirmus appetit ea quae nocent, quia existimat, ea prodesse: sic Beati, tanquam mente sani, appetunt aliorum glorificationem, quae vere est eis proficua, damnati vero Beatorum damnationem, quam existimant sibi utilem et delectabilem, sicut invidus alterius subversionem; attamen, si eveniret, non propter hoc miseria eorum decresceret, immo succresceret. Multa enim volunt impii et peccatores, quae si obtinerent, essent miseriores. Ad haec confirmanda multum facit auctoritas Augustini in secundo capitulo[^p1040-6], ubi dicit, quod ira, odium et caecitas in damnatis excrescent.

---

english:
### Question III. *Whether the damned would rather that all were damned, than that some be damned and some blessed.*

Thirdly it is asked whether the damned would rather that all were damned, than that some be damned and some blessed. And that they would rather have all damned is shown:

1. First, by that which men are commonly accustomed to say[^p1039-3]: « It is a solace to the wretched to have companions of their punishments ».

2. Likewise, this is shown by what is said in Isaiah the fourteenth[^p1039-4]: *They have risen up from their thrones;* the Gloss: « It is a solace to the wicked to have many companions of their punishments ».

3. Likewise, Augustine, *On Catechizing the Uninstructed*[^p1039-5]: « Be on your guard, lest the enemy creep upon you from another quarter, because he seeks out, as the most malevolent solace of his own will, those with whom he may be damned »: therefore that is the solace of the wicked: if therefore they themselves seek and desire what makes for solace, it is clear, etc.

4. Likewise, it seems so *by reason:* because envy arises from a defect of charity and from love of one's own good[^p1039-6]; but both of these are in the damned: therefore there is in them the greatest envy: therefore, if an envious man would wish no one to be seen good nor blessed: therefore the damned would wish that all together with them were damned, rather than that some be damned and some blessed.

5. Likewise, the Saints and the damned are enemies to one another, on account of this, that the damned are enemies of God: therefore since the damned do not love their enemies, but rather hate them, and he who hates another would rather see him wretched than blessed; therefore, etc.

**Contra:** 1. In Luke the sixteenth[^p1039-7] it is said of the rich man that he prayed for his brothers, that they might not come *into the place of torments:* therefore, since the damned have many kinsmen in heaven, therefore they would rather that these be in heaven than in hell.

2. Likewise, the damned, although they have an evil will, nevertheless have not lost natural affection; which is clear, because the most impious men love their neighbours; but in the present life, if a wretched father has a wretched son, he does not rejoice, but is rather saddened at such fellowship: therefore likewise in hell.

3. Likewise, if the damned desired the damnation of others: therefore, just as the damnation of others would grow, so also would their consolation, because desire, if it be fulfilled, delights the soul: therefore after the damnation of all they would be in greater consolation; which is manifestly false — rather, desolation will grow, as is said upon that verse of the Psalm[^p1039-8]: *The desire of sinners shall perish;* the Gloss: « With no solace following ».

4. Likewise, a Blessed one added to the multitude of the elect multiplies joy[^p1039-9]: therefore *from the opposites* a damned one amplifies grief; but just as the Blessed one desires the amplification of his joy, so the damned one the diminution of his grief: therefore, since the Blessed always wish the wretched to come to glory, the damned shrink from having any descend to their misery; therefore they would not wish the Blessed to be damned.

### Conclusion

> *Generally speaking, the damned would rather that all be wretched, than that some be blessed while they themselves remain wretched.*

**I respond:** It must be said that although in the damned the lustful affections are in some way slackened on account of the magnitude of their punishments — those affections, I say, which have delight annexed to them — nevertheless the other affections, in which there is penalty, are invigorated; hence, although the affection of lusting and of domineering actually ceases, nevertheless the affection or fury of impatience and the malice of envy is intensified; hence then *they shall gnash <!-- page 1040 --> with their teeth and pine away*[^p1040-1]. And since hatred and envy will be strong in them, they will also be vehemently saddened and will pine away at the glory of God's elect; and therefore, to sate their most impious rivalry and hatred, they would wish that none be blessed, but rather that all be wretched. And because they themselves can neither attain to beatitude nor remove others from the state of beatitude, therefore they vehemently pine away and are confounded within themselves. — It must therefore be granted that, generally speaking, they would rather that all be wretched, than that, while they themselves remain wretched, some be blessed. — And the reasons for this are to be granted.

**To the arguments for the opposite side:**

*To 1.* To that which is objected concerning that rich man, who did not wish his brothers to be damned; it must be said that although in general the damned do not wish to see any blessed, but all wretched; nevertheless, because they have more especially a natural and private love of certain persons, they would not wish these to be damned while others remain in the state of glory[^p1040-2]; because, even if those be damned, there still remains rivalry and occasion for pining away. It would not be so concerning all.

*To 2.* And by this the following argument concerning natural affection is clear; nevertheless they love no one so naturally that they would not wish them to be damned, on this condition, that none be blessed. And the example is clear in those who hold a mortal hatred, who desire the life of their kinsmen; and yet they would wish that many of their kinsmen were dead, so that they might be able to fulfil the desire[^p1040-3] of vengeance upon their enemies.

*To 3.* To that which is objected, that if they desire damnation, etc.; it must be said that they do not desire the damnation of any whatsoever, but[^p1040-4] of those whom they *envy,* for this reason, that they see them exalted, and of those from *comparison with whom they are confounded,* and these are the Blessed; and because they cannot obtain this, therefore they do not thereby gain solace, but thereby have great torment.

*To 4.* To that[^p1040-5], that they shrink from desolation; it must be said that just as a healthy man, in whom nature is well disposed, seeks the foods suitable to him, whereas a sick man seeks those things which harm him, because he judges them to be of profit: so the Blessed, as being sound of mind, seek the glorification of others, which is truly profitable to them, whereas the damned seek the damnation of the Blessed, which they judge useful and delightful to themselves, as the envious man seeks another's overthrow; and yet, if it came about, their misery would not on that account decrease, but rather increase. For the impious and sinners will many things which, if they obtained them, would make them more wretched. To confirm these things the authority of Augustine in the second chapter[^p1040-6] does much, where he says that anger, hatred and blindness will increase in the damned.

---

la: Seneca, de Consolat. ad Marciam, c. 12, ait: *Malevoli solatii genus est turba miserorum.*

en: Seneca, *On Consolation, to Marcia,* c. 12, says: *A crowd of the wretched is a malevolent kind of solace.*

la: Vers. 9. — In Glossa *ordinaria* apud Strabum et Lyranum substituitur *inimicos* pro *multos.* Hieron., V. Comment. in Isai. 13, 9: *Solatium enim malorum est, cum inimicos viderint eadem sustinere.*

en: Verse 9. — In the *Ordinary* Gloss, in Strabo and Lyra, *enemies* is substituted for *many.* Jerome, *Commentary on Isaiah,* bk. V, on Isa. 13:9: *For it is a solace to the wicked, when they see their enemies undergo the same things.*

la: Cap. 25. n. 48, ubi textus originalis post *subrepat* prosequitur: *qui ad solatium malevolentissimum damnationis suae cum quibus damnetur inquirit.*

en: C. 25, n. 48, where the original text after *subrepat* continues: *who, for the most malevolent solace of his own damnation, seeks out those with whom he may be damned.*

la: Cfr. August., XI. de Gen. ad lit. c. 14. n. 18.

en: Cf. Augustine, *On Genesis to the Letter,* bk. XI, c. 14, n. 18.

la: Vers. 27. seq.: *Rogo ergo te, pater, ut mittas... ne et ipsi veniant in hunc locum tormentorum.*

en: Verse 27 f.: *I beseech thee therefore, father, that thou wouldst send... lest they also come into this place of torments.*

la: Psalm. 111, 10. — Glossam exhibet Petr. Lombard. et Lyranus (ut *interlinearem*), quae est sumta ex August., in hunc loc. n. 8.

en: Psalm 111:10. — Peter Lombard and Lyra give the Gloss (as an *interlinear* one), which is taken from Augustine, on this passage, n. 8.

la: Cfr. supra pag. 1010, nota 6. — Inferius post *amplificat* codd. K L (I a secunda manu) supplent *damnatis.*

en: Cf. above, p. 1010, note 6. — Below, after *amplificat,* codices K L (I by a second hand) supply *damnatis.*

la: Psalm. 111, 10: *Peccator... dentibus suis fremet et tabescet.* — Inferius pro *et odium,* quod codd. A K omittunt, cod. P *hominum,* plures alii codd. et edd. I *et hominum.* Subinde pro *pertingere* cod. K (I a secunda manu) *pervenire.*

en: Psalm 111:10: *The sinner... shall gnash with his teeth and pine away.* — Below, in place of *et odium,* which codices A K omit, codex P has *hominum,* several other codices and edition I *et hominum.* Then, in place of *pertingere,* codex K (I by a second hand) has *pervenire.*

la: Cfr. Glossa *ordinaria* apud Strabum in Luc. 16, 27.

en: Cf. the *Ordinary* Gloss, in Strabo, on Luke 16:27.

la: Ita codd. U X et ed. I, in aliis *effectum.*

en: So codices U X and edition I; in the others, *effectum.*

la: Cod. G *sed extraneis* (nonnulli codd. legunt: *sed ex quibus invident*). Cod. K *dicendum, quod verum est, et maxime eorum, quibus invident.* Inferius pro *et illorum,* quod edd. omittunt, cod. D *et illos.*

en: Codex G has *sed extraneis* (several codices read: *sed ex quibus invident*). Codex K has *dicendum, quod verum est, et maxime eorum, quibus invident.* Below, in place of *et illorum,* which the editions omit, codex D has *et illos.*

la: Cod. G addit *quod obiicitur;* plures codd. et ed. I *Ad aliud,* cui perperam addunt *dicendum.*

en: Codex G adds *quod obiicitur;* several codices and edition I have *Ad aliud,* to which they wrongly add *dicendum.*

la: Hic in lit. Magistri. — Infra pro *excrescent* codd. vel *excrescerent,* vel *excresceret.* — Vide scholion ad I. huius articuli quaest.

en: Here in the Master's text. — Below, in place of *excrescent,* the codices have either *excrescerent* or *excresceret.* — See the scholion on question I of this article. ---

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** Latin re-set from `raw/bonaventure_vol4_raw.txt` L110671–110809, verified column-by-column against the 450 dpi bands `/tmp/colcrop/vol4-p10{39,40}-{L,R}-{0,1,2}.png` (measured gutters 1039:1615, 1040:2040). No bands were regenerated. In the cascade-shattered Respondeo/Solutio and in every footer, the band read is authoritative; the raw was used only for clean running prose and marker spacing. Band-vs-raw disagreements resolved to the band: `consequuntur` (raw `consequenlur`), `cap. 25 n. 48` (raw `n. iS`), `Psalm. 111, 10` (raw `Psidm. III, 10`), `August., XI. de Gen. ad lit. c. 14. n. 18` (raw `c. 14. n. IS`), `affectum` (raw `affectum'`). No ambiguity flags.

**Page span.** `printed_pages: [1039, 1040]` — **confirmed correct**, no change. p.1039 is shared: the chunk opens at the full-width `QUAESTIO III.` header, which prints across the gutter roughly mid-page. p.1040 ends the chunk at `...in damnatis excrescent.` (foot of the L column + top of the R column); `ARTICULUS II. De excaecatione damnatorum.` begins immediately below on the same page.

**Title.** Verified off the band: the line after the `QUAESTIO III.` header reads *Utrum damnati mallent, omnes esse damnatos, quam quosdam damnatos, quosdam beatos.* — identical to the frontmatter `title_la`. No correction needed.

**Apparatus split map (13 entries claimed).**
- **p.1039 — 9 notes printed, binding is NOT page-uniform.** L footer prints notes 1–5, R footer prints the tail of note 5 plus notes 6–9. Notes **1** (*maluimus*) and **2** (*Vide scholion ad praecedentem quaest.*) print in the **left** footer but anchor in the **right** body column, in the tail of `p1-a1-q2` — they belong to **q2, not here.** This chunk claims **notes 3–9** (7 entries). Note 5 breaks off mid-sentence at the foot of the left footer (`post subrepat pro-`) and completes at the head of the right footer (`sequitur: qui ad solatium…`); the two halves are rendered joined as `p1039-5`.
- **p.1040 — 7 notes printed.** L footer holds notes 1–4, R footer holds 5–7. Notes 1–2 anchor in the L body, 3–6 in the R body: all six are this chunk's. **Note 7** (*Alias visus esset frustra; « Deus autem et natura nihil frustra faciunt »…*) anchors at `videre debeant⁷` in `ARTICULUS II, QUAESTIO I` — **forwarded to `IV-d50-p1-a2-q1`.** This chunk claims **notes 1–6** (6 entries).

**Head/tail runover check.**
- p.1039 footer — **head:** first entry is a numbered `1`; no unnumbered fragment from p.1038. **Tail:** note 9 closes complete (`…supplent damnatis.`); nothing runs over to p.1040.
- p.1040 footer — **head:** first entry is a numbered `1`; no unnumbered fragment from p.1039 (independently corroborates p.1039's clean tail). **Tail:** note 7 closes complete (`…qui caeci fuerant in praesenti.`); nothing runs over to p.1041.

**Closing boundary (L110809/110810) verified off the band.** The chunk's last sentence — *Ad haec confirmanda multum facit auctoritas Augustini in secundo capitulo, ubi dicit, quod ira, odium et caecitas in damnatis excrescent.* — parses complete. Immediately below it on p.1040 the band shows the full-width `ARTICULUS II.` / *De excaecatione damnatorum.* heading, followed directly by `Consequenter quantum ad secundum articulum quaeritur…`. **Nothing is trapped between**; no swallowed question at the last-quaestio-of-the-article position.

**p.1039 seam with `p1-a1-q2`, derived independently off the bands.** q2's tail occupies the top of p.1039's L column (`…quae est per modum desiderii…`) and the top of its R column, ending at `…quam propter illam induere conditionem servilem²`. The `QUAESTIO III.` header prints full-width below that. This chunk therefore begins at `Tertio quaeritur…` and claims none of p.1039's body above the header, and none of its footer notes 1–2. No hand-off was taken from a neighbour.

**Article-count cross-check.** Article I promises three questions (`de qua tria quaeruntur` in the article opener, held by q1) and the three ordinal openers *Primo / Secundo / Tertio quaeritur* are all present; this is the third and last. Article II's opener at p.1040 likewise promises three and shows all three ordinals.

**Scholion.** None in this chunk, and this is correct, not a dropout: p.1039 note 2 reads *Vide scholion ad praecedentem quaest.*, and p.1040 note 6 reads *Vide scholion ad I. huius articuli quaest.* — both point back to Article I's single scholion, which lives in `p1-a1-q1`.

**Narrow-run page 1040.** Bands read clean at the measured gutter 2040; no clipping observed on any of the six bands. No re-crop performed or needed.

**Marginalia trimmed** (editorial side-glosses, not Bonaventure's text): `Fundamenta.`, `Ad oppositum.`, `Notandum.` (p.1039); `Conclusio.`, `Solutio oppositorum.`, `Notandum.`, `Exemplum.`, `Notandum` ×2 (p.1040). The `Distinctio.` gloss at the head of p.1039's R column belongs to q2's text, not to this chunk.

**Anchor parity.** Latin body: 13 `[^` anchors. English body: 13 `[^` anchors. Apparatus: 13 definitions. Matched.


title: Dist. 50, Part 1, Art. 2, Q. 1

source_text:
<!-- page 1040 -->

### Articulus II. *De excaecatione damnatorum.*

Consequenter quantum ad secundum articulum quaeritur de excaecatione sive tenebrositate damnatorum; de qua tria quaeruntur.

Primo quaeritur, utrum sint ibi tenebrae corporales.

Secundo, utrum sint in eis tenebrae spirituales quantum ad actum cognoscendi.

Tertio, utrum quantum ad actum memorandi.

### Quaestio I. *Utrum in inferno sint tenebrae corporales.*

Quantum ergo ad primum sic proceditur, et ostenditur, quod non erunt ibi tenebrae corporales:

1. Quia constat, quod reprobi habent potentiam videndi, vel etiam habituri sunt post iudicium: ergo cum visus natus sit exire in actum, videtur, quod videre debeant[^p1040-7]; sed non est videre sine luce: ergo etc.

2. Item, boni videbunt alios Sanctos ad suam gloriam, maxime illos quos converterunt: ergo similiter, si mali debent invicem confundi, maxime qui <!-- page 1041 --> aliis malum exemplum dederunt, sicut Arius: ergo similiter debent eos videre[^p1041-1].

3. Item, lux naturaliter sequitur ignem, ergo ubi est aggregatio ignis, et luminis; sed haec est in inferno[^p1041-2]: ergo etc.

**Contra:**

1. Matthaei vigesimo secundo[^p1041-3]: *Ligatis pedibus et manibus, proiicite eum in tenebras exteriores*; super quo Gregorius: «Si ille ignis lucem haberet, qui repelluntur in tenebras exteriores mitti nequaquam dicerentur».

2. Item, *ratione* videtur: quia, sicut boni praemiantur per visum, ita mali similiter debent puniri; sed tenebrae plus gravant homines habentes oculos ad videndum: ergo etc.

3. Item, dulce est lumen et delectabile[^p1041-4]: ergo si damnatis est omnis delectatio auferenda, ergo et omnis illuminatio corporalis.

### Conclusio

> In inferno est tantum ignis fumosus et tenebrosus, non illuminans nisi ad videnda tristia et horribilia.

**Respondeo:** Ad hoc respondet Isidorus[^p1041-5] inquiens: «Ignem gehennae habere lucem ad aliquid, ad aliquid non habere, verum est; lucebit enim ad desolationem, ut habeant unde doleant, non ad consolationem, ne habeant unde gaudeant».

Ad quod intelligendum notandum, quod ignis est in triplici differentia. Est enim ignis *purus*, ut est in propria materia; et est ignis *incorporatus*, ut est in materia aliena, ut in terrea vel aërea; et est ignis non tantum *incorporatus*, sed etiam *permixtus*, ut ignis sulphureus et fumosus. Primus est *lux* et pure lucet et abundanter. Secundus est *ignis-carbo* et *flamma*[^p1041-6]; hic autem lucet et tenebram expellit. Tertius est *ignis fumosus*, et talis est tenebrosus, et iste erit in inferno.

Rursus notandum, quod lux illuminat oculum ad videndum; potest ergo illuminare ad videndum *delectabilia*, vel ad videndum *indifferentia*, vel ad videndum *tristia* et horribilia. Primo et secundo modo non erit illuminatio, sed tertio modo tantum.

**Ad argumenta:** Secundum hoc igitur patent obiecta. Nam rationes probantes, quod non sit ibi ignis lucens, procedunt secundum lucis puritatem *illuminantem ad delectandum*. Rationes vero probantes, quod sit ibi ignis lucens, procedunt de luce *communiter*, secundum quod tenebris fumositatis[^p1041-7] admixta et illuminans ad desolationem et horrorem.

> **De numeratione notarum.** Quaracchi restarts its footnote numbering on every printed page. The apparatus below is therefore labelled by page: note 7 of page 1040, then notes 1–7 of page 1041. Notes 1–6 of page 1040 anchor in the preceding question (p1-a1-q3), and notes 8–9 of page 1041 anchor in the following question (p1-a2-q2).

english:
### Article II. *On the blinding of the damned.*

Next, with respect to the second article, inquiry is made concerning the blinding or darkening of the damned; and about this three questions are asked.

First it is asked, whether there are bodily darknesses there.

Second, whether there are in them spiritual darknesses with respect to the act of knowing.

Third, whether with respect to the act of remembering.

### Question I. *Whether in hell there are bodily darknesses.*

With respect to the first, then, one proceeds thus, and it is shown that there will not be bodily darknesses there:

1. Because it is established that the reprobate have the power of seeing, or even are going to have it after the judgement: therefore, since sight is by nature apt to go forth into act, it seems that they ought to see[^p1040-7]; but there is no seeing without light: therefore etc.

2. Likewise, the good will see the other Saints unto their own glory, especially those whom they converted: therefore likewise, if the wicked ought to be mutually confounded, especially those who gave others a bad example, like Arius: therefore likewise they ought to see them[^p1041-1].

3. Likewise, light naturally follows fire; therefore where there is a gathering of fire, there is also a gathering of light; but this is in hell[^p1041-2]: therefore etc.

**Contra:**

1. Matthew, chapter twenty-two[^p1041-3]: *With his feet and hands bound, cast him into the exterior darknesses*; on which Gregory says: "If that fire had light, those who are driven back would by no means be said to be sent into the exterior darknesses."

2. Likewise, it seems so *by reason*: because, just as the good are rewarded through sight, so likewise the wicked ought to be punished; but darknesses weigh more heavily upon men having eyes to see: therefore etc.

3. Likewise, light is sweet and delightful[^p1041-4]: therefore, if every delight is to be taken away from the damned, then also every bodily illumination.

### Conclusion

> In hell there is only a smoky and dark fire, illuminating nothing except for the seeing of sad and horrible things.

**I respond:** To this Isidore replies[^p1041-5], saying: "That the fire of Gehenna has light for one thing, and does not have it for another, is true; for it will shine unto desolation, that they may have whence to grieve, not unto consolation, lest they have whence to rejoice."

For the understanding of which it must be noted that fire exists in a threefold difference. For there is *pure* fire, as it is in its own proper matter; and there is *incorporated* fire, as it is in an alien matter, as in earthy or airy matter; and there is fire not only *incorporated* but also *intermixed*, as sulphurous and smoky fire. The first is *light*, and it shines purely and abundantly. The second is *coal-fire* and *flame*[^p1041-6]; and this shines and drives out darkness. The third is *smoky fire*, and such fire is dark, and this is the fire that will be in hell.

Again it must be noted that light illuminates the eye for seeing; it can therefore illuminate for the seeing of *delightful* things, or for the seeing of *indifferent* things, or for the seeing of *sad* and horrible things. In the first and second mode there will be no illumination, but only in the third mode.

**To the arguments:** According to this, therefore, the objections are clear. For the reasons proving that there is not a shining fire there proceed according to the purity of light *illuminating unto delight*. But the reasons proving that there is a shining fire there proceed from light taken *commonly*, according as it is mixed with the darknesses of smokiness[^p1041-7] and illuminates unto desolation and horror.

la: Alias visus esset frustra; «Deus autem et natura nihil frustra faciunt», ut ait Aristot., I. *de Caelo et mundo*, text. 32. (c. 4.). — De seq. propos. cfr. Aristot., II. *de Anima*, text. 67. seqq. (c. 7.) et text. 172. (III. c. 3.). — Superius post *iudicium* cod. aa addit: *qui caeci fuerant in praesenti*.

en: Otherwise sight would be in vain; "but God and nature do nothing in vain," as Aristotle says, *On the Heavens and the World*, I, text. 32 (c. 4.). — On the following proposition cf. Aristotle, *On the Soul*, II, text. 67 ff. (c. 7.) and text. 172 (III, c. 3.). — Above, after *iudicium*, codex aa adds: *qui caeci fuerant in praesenti* ("who had been blind in the present life").

la: Gregor., IX. *Moral.* c. 66. n. 101: *Quamvis illic ignis et ad consolationem non lucet, et tamen, ut magis torqueat, ad aliquid lucet. Nam sequaces quousque suos secum in tormento reprobi flamma illustrante visuri sunt* etc.

en: Gregory, *Morals* IX, c. 66, n. 101: *Although there the fire does not shine unto consolation, nevertheless, that it may torment the more, it shines for something. For the reprobate, by the light of the flame, are going to see their own followers with them in torment,* etc.

la: Ut ostensum est supra d. 44. p. II. a. 2. q. 1. — Edd. *ibi et luminis*.

en: As was shown above, d. 44, p. II, a. 2, q. 1. — The editions read *ibi et luminis* ("there also of light").

la: Vers. 13: *Ligatis manibus et pedibus eius, mittite eum* etc. — Gregor., IX. *Moral.* c. 65. n. 97, praedicto verbo Domini subiungit: *Si itaque ignis, qui reprobos cruciat, lumen habere potuisset, is qui repellitur, nequaquam mitti in tenebras diceretur.*

en: Verse 13: *With his hands and feet bound, cast him* etc. — Gregory, *Morals* IX, c. 65, n. 97, appends to the aforesaid word of the Lord: *If therefore the fire which torments the reprobate had been able to have light, he who is driven back would by no means be said to be sent into the darknesses.*

la: Euripides: «Quivis homo delectatur, dum lumen videt». August., *Serm.* 28. (alias 7. editor. ex Carthus. mss.) n. 3: *Lux ista cibus est oculorum; hac lumina nostra pascuntur, et si quis diutius in tenebris fuerit, tanquam ieiunando deficiunt* etc. Cfr. *in Ioan. Evang.* tr. 13. n. 5. — Codd. L Y addunt *est oculis*. In fine arg. ex codd. L R Y substituimus *illuminatio corporalis* pro *delectatio corporalis*, cod. F *lux corporalis*.

en: Euripides: "Any man whatever is delighted while he sees the light." Augustine, *Sermon* 28 (elsewhere 7 among the editors, from the Carthusian manuscripts), n. 3: *That light is the food of the eyes; by it our lights are fed, and if anyone should be in darkness for a longer time, they fail as though by fasting,* etc. Cf. *On the Gospel of John*, tract. 13, n. 5. — Codices L Y add *est oculis* ("it is to the eyes"). At the end of the argument we have substituted, from codices L R Y, *illuminatio corporalis* for *delectatio corporalis*; codex F reads *lux corporalis*.

la: Libr. I. *Sent.* c. 28. n. 2: *Ignem gehennae ad aliquid lumen habere, ad aliquid non habere; hoc est, habere lumen ad damnationem, ut videant impii unde doleant; et non habere ad consolationem, ne videant unde gaudeant.*

en: *Sentences*, Book I, c. 28, n. 2: *That the fire of Gehenna has light for one thing, and does not have it for another; that is, it has light unto damnation, so that the impious may see whence they should grieve; and it does not have it unto consolation, lest they see whence they should rejoice.*

la: Secundum Aristot., V. *Topic.* c. 3. (c. 5.) tres sunt species ignis, scil. *carbo*, *flamma* et *lux*. Cfr. supra pag. 926, nota 8. — Superius pro *ut in terrea vel aërea* aliquot codd. et edd. *ut in terra vel aëre*. Mox pro *tenebram* cod. L *tenebras*.

en: According to Aristotle, *Topics* V, c. 3 (c. 5.), there are three species of fire, namely *coal*, *flame*, and *light*. Cf. above, p. 926, note 8. — Above, for *ut in terrea vel aërea* several codices and editions read *ut in terra vel aëre*. Presently, for *tenebram*, codex L reads *tenebras*.

la: Plures codd. et edd. supplent *est*. Pro *fumositatis* codd. B C L R U Y *fumositatum*, edd. *fumositas*.

en: Several codices and editions supply *est*. For *fumositatis* codices B C L R U Y read *fumositatum*; the editions read *fumositas*. ---

latin_scholion:
**I.** Quaestionem I. eodem sensu solvunt: S. Thom., hic q. 2. a. 3. quaestiunc. 4; Suppl. q. 97. a. 4. — B. Albert., hic a. 4. — Petr. a Tar., hic q. 4. a. 2. — Richard. a Med., hic a. 5. q. 1. — De toto art. Durand., hic q. 1; Dionys. Carth., hic q. 2. 3. (passim tangens).

**II.** De cognitione damnatorum plura quaeruntur infra p. II. a. 1; ubi etiam ab aliis Lombardi commentatoribus duae seqq. quaestiones, de quibus specialiter non tractant, implicite solvuntur.

---

english_scholion:
**I.** Question I is solved in the same sense by: St. Thomas, here q. 2, a. 3, quaestiuncula 4; *Supplement* q. 97, a. 4. — Blessed Albert, here a. 4. — Peter of Tarantasia, here q. 4, a. 2. — Richard of Middleton, here a. 5, q. 1. — On the whole article, Durandus, here q. 1; Denis the Carthusian, here q. 2, 3 (touching on it throughout).

**II.** Concerning the knowledge of the damned more is asked below, in Part II, a. 1; where also the two following questions, of which the other commentators on Lombard do not treat specially, are implicitly solved by them.

---

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** Latin re-set from `raw/bonaventure_vol4_raw.txt` L110810–110925, verified line-by-line against the 450 dpi column bands `/tmp/colcrop/vol4-p104{0,1}-{L,R}-{0,1,2}.png` (measured gutters 1040:2040, 1041:1659). No bands were regenerated. Reading order: left column top→bottom, then right; body bands then footer bands.

**Page span.** `printed_pages: [1040, 1041]` **verified correct — no change.** The p.1040 running head is missing from the raw (p.1039's head is at L110647, p.1041's at L110867), so the p.1040/1041 break was derived from the bands: p.1041 opens at *aliis malum exemplum dederunt* (arg. 2 of the *pars negativa*), mid-sentence after *maxime qui*.

**Article opener folded in.** `ARTICULUS II. — De excaecatione damnatorum` and its praenotata (*Consequenter quantum ad secundum articulum… de qua tria quaeruntur*, plus the three ordinal openers) are carried here, per the "short opener folds into that article's q1" convention. Both `ARTICULUS II.` and `QUAESTIO I.` print **centred full-width across the gutter** on p.1040 and fragment across the two bands — the lost-question signature — so they were read off the bands, not grepped.

**Question count.** Article II promises **"tria quaeruntur"** and all three ordinal openers print and are legible on the bands: *Primo quaeritur, utrum sint ibi tenebrae corporales* (p.1040-L), *Secundo, utrum sint in eis tenebrae spirituales quantum ad actum cognoscendi* and *Tertio, utrum quantum ad actum memorandi* (p.1040-R). **3 promised, 3 present** — matching chunks `p1-a2-q{1,2,3}`. Nothing hidden.

**Seam with `p1-a1-q3` (derived independently off the bands, not from a hand-off).** a1-q3 runs to *…ira, odium et caecitas in damnatis excrescent.* at the foot of p.1040's **right** upper column block; this chunk opens at the full-width `ARTICULUS II.` header immediately below it. Both sentences parse; no cascade-merge.

**Apparatus page-split map (8 entries here).**
- **p.1040 — 7 notes total** (left footer 1–4, right footer 5–7). Notes 1–4 anchor in a1-q3's left column (*tabescent*¹, *statu gloriae*²), 3–4 in its right column (*affectum*³, *sed*⁴), 5 at *Ad illud*⁵ and 6 at *cundo capitulo*⁶ — **all six belong to `p1-a1-q3`**. Only **note 7** (*videre debeant*⁷) anchors here. Register splits exactly at the body-column boundary on this page.
- **p.1041 — 9 notes total** (left footer 1–4 + the tail of 4 running into the right footer; right footer 5–9). Notes **1–7 anchor in this chunk**; notes 8 (*Sapientiae secundo*⁸) and 9 (*super Psalmum sextum*⁹) anchor in `QUAESTIO II` and are **forwarded to `p1-a2-q2`**.

**⚠ The raw drops p.1041's ENTIRE footer register.** Nothing between the p.1041 running head (L110867) and `SCHOLIOK` (L110916) is a numbered footer note. All nine of p.1041's notes were transcribed from the bands. (p.1040's register survives in the raw and was cross-checked.)

**Cross-page runover check — head and tail of every register.**
- p.1040 head: left footer opens on a numbered `1 Psalm. 111, 10` — no unnumbered fragment from p.1039. Tail: note 7 closes complete (*qui caeci fuerant in praesenti.*) — nothing runs onto p.1041.
- p.1041 head: left footer opens on a numbered `1 Gregor., IX. Moral.` — no inherited fragment. Tail: note 9 closes complete (*additur tunc peccatores.*) — nothing runs onto p.1042.
- **Intra-page runover found:** p.1041 **note 4 breaks off mid-word across the gutter** — the left footer ends *…Codd. L Y addunt* est ocu- and an **unnumbered continuation sits at the head of the right footer**: *lis. In fine arg. ex codd. L R Y substituimus…*. Rendered joined to note 4. Had only the left footer band been read, that whole clause (the *illuminatio corporalis* / *delectatio corporalis* / *lux corporalis* variant) would have been lost.

**Scholion placement.** `SCHOLIOK` at L110916 is the OCR garble of `SCHOLION` — the header prints **centred full-width** on p.1041 (`SCHOLI` on the L band, `OLION.` on the R), which is why it shattered. It is Article II's scholion and by corpus convention lives in this article's q1. It is placed **last** in both the `## Latin` and `## English` blocks, after the body, regardless of the source printing it above `QUAESTIO II`.

**Band-vs-OCR disagreements resolved at band time (band authoritative).** The raw mangles every digit in Scholion I: raw *quaestiunc. i / Suppl. q. 97. a. i / B. Alhert. hic a. i / Petr. a Tar., hic q. i. n. 2* → bands read **quaestiunc. 4 / Suppl. q. 97. a. 4 / B. Albert., hic a. 4 / Petr. a Tar., hic q. 4. a. 2**. Scholion II's *infra p. II. a. 1* was resolved by direct glyph comparison against known `1` and `4` forms in Scholion I at 1.7× magnification — it is a `1`, consistent with `p2-a1` existing. Body: raw *terea/teirea* → **terrea**; *sulphurcus* → **sulphureus**; *proiicile* → **proiicite**; *deleetahilia* → **delectabilia**; *igois* → **ignis**; *lueis* → **lucis**.

**Marginalia trimmed** (editorial, not Bonaventure's text): *Argg. pro parte negativa*, *Conclusio*, *Distinctio*, *Ignis triplex*, *Conclusio 1*, *Conclusio 2*, *Ad argg.* Also trimmed: the p.1041 signature line *S. Bonav. — Tom. IV.* and the gathering mark *131*.

**Bands.** No band was clipped. p.1040 is a narrow-run page and its columns read complete at the given gutter (2040); nothing was re-cropped.

**Ambiguity flags:** none.

**Anchor count:** Latin 8, English 8, apparatus defs 8 — matched.