title: Dist. 20, Part 1, Art. 1, Q. 4

source_text:
<!-- page 521 -->

### Quaestio IV. *Utrum in poena purgatorii sit minor certitudo de gloria quam in via.*

Quarto quaeritur, utrum in illa poena sit minor certitudo de gloria quam in via. Et quod sic, videtur:

1. Quia quanto status similior est statui, quem homo omnino respuit, tanto maiorem timorem incutit ei[^1] qui in eodem existit; sed status purgatorii magis similis est statui infernali quam status vitae praesentis: ergo augetur in eo timor: ergo per oppositum minuitur certitudo.

2. Item, anima peccatrix punitur timore et dolore, sicut econtra anima iusta reficitur gaudio et spe; sed in purgatorio augetur poena doloris[^2]: ergo pari ratione poena timoris: ergo minuitur certitudo futurae beatitudinis.

3. Item, si augeretur certitudo, augeretur consolatio, et si augeretur consolatio, minueretur flagellatio: ergo si esset ibi maior certitudo, esset ibi minor afflictio quam in praesenti; sed non est minor, sed maior afflictio quam in praesenti: ergo est minor certitudo.

4. Item, si maior esset certitudo, ibi non ambulet anima per speciem, sed per fidem[^3], quae non evacuatur, quousque veniat lux gloriae; esset ibi maior fides, et si maior fides, maior gratia: ergo a destructione consequentis, si gratia non est maior in purgatorio, nec maior videtur, quod sit certitudo: ergo saltem ita dubitat anima ibi, sicut hic. Sed hic nescit, utrum odio, an amore digna sit: ergo et ibi nescit, utrum sit in inferno, vel extra.

**Contra:**
1. Magis est certus per spem qui sperat et non potest desperare, quam qui sperat et desperare potest; sed animae, quae sunt in purgatorio, ita sperant, quod desperare non possunt, in via autem desperare possunt: ergo etc.

2. Item, maior est certitudo in eo, in quo nulla est dubitatio, quam in eo, in quo cadit dubitatio, — haec est per se vera — sed in eo qui est in purgatorio, non cadit dubitatio de gloria habenda: ergo est ibi maior certitudo. Probatio minoris: si potest dubitare, se perventurum; et qui potest dubitare, potest consequenter opinari; et qui potest opinari, potest credere et errare circa utramque partem[^4]: ergo cum anima talis non possit errare, non videtur, quod possit dubitare.

<!-- page 522 -->

3. Item, si venit ex hoc titubatio, aut ex subreptione, aut ex scientia certa: non ex subreptione, quia hoc competit animae ratione coniunctionis suae cum carne, a qua opprimitur et non omnino est domina actuum suorum. Non ex certa scientia; probatio: anima, quae est in purgatorio, certa fide cognoscit, quod in inferno vermis non moritur[^5]; certa fide cognoscit, quod anima in inferno non melioratur; certa fide cognoscit, quod in inferno desperatione cruciatur; sed constat, quod opposita videt in se: ergo ex deliberatione non potest de his dubitare, quin cadat a vera fide. Sed non potest fieri infidelis: ergo non potest ex certa scientia dubitare; nec ex subreptione dubitat: ergo nullo modo: ergo etc.

4. Item, cum anima a carne separatur, se ipsam nudam intuetur: ergo videt quod habet in se, ergo novit, utrum habeat culpam mortalem, an gratiam; et certa est, quod si habet gratiam, non potest ad infernum descendere: ergo videtur, quod nullo iudicio dubitet: ergo multo maior certitudo est de gloria in purgatorio quam in praesenti saeculo.

### Conclusio

> In purgatorio est maior certitudo de gloria quam in via, minor quam in patria.

**Respondeo:** Ad praedictorum intelligentiam est notandum secundum quosdam, quod pro acerbitate poenarum[^6] ita absorbetur spiritus, ut ubi sit ignoret et ex hoc dubitet, utrum sit in inferno, an extra. Sicut enim anima ex dulcedine extra se rapitur, ut nesciat, utrum in corpore, an extra corpus[^7] hoc videat; sic suo modo dicunt in poenis se habere. Et pro statu illo dicunt minorem certitudinem secundum actum esse, licet non sit minor secundum habitum, immo quodam modo maior.

Sed certe non videtur hoc rationabiliter sustineri: primum, quia, etsi spiritus carni coniunctus possit ab huiusmodi poenis adeo absorberi, ut usum rationis amittat, spiritus tamen separatus, qui immortalis est, non videtur adeo absorberi, cum fortior sit ad sustinendam magnam poenam in se quam in corpore parvam. — Et quod illud verum sit, patet per verba Gregorii in quarto Dialogorum[^8], ubi dicit, quod quidam in purgatorio existentes in gravibus poenis petierunt adiutorium pro liberatione: ergo sciebant se aliquando liberandos. — Patet etiam per illud quod dicitur in homilia de divite et Lazaro[^9], ubi dicit, quod « damnati supra se electos considerant usque in diem iudicii ». Si ergo poena illa infernalis improportionaliter gravior est quam purgatoria; et illa non absorbet usum rationis in damnatis, qui sunt oppressi verme et desperatione et culpa: quanto magis nec ista poena absorbebit spiritus iustorum,

<!-- page 523 -->

qui fortificati sunt bona conscientia et spe et divina gratia? Certe non videtur.

Ideo dicendum, quod animae in purgatorio maiorem habent certitudinem de gloria quam etiam illae quae in via sunt, sicut habebant animae in limbo; et ista certitudo media est inter certitudinem viae et patriae. In patria enim est certitudo tentionis evacuans exspectationem et timorem; in via vero certitudo est exspectationis mixta[^10] timori, quia quilibet labi potest, dum est viator; in purgatorio est medio modo, scilicet certitudo exspectationis, quia nondum obtinuit, sed est evacuatio timoris propter confirmationem liberi arbitrii, qua deinceps scit se peccare non posse. — Et sic patet, quod est maior certitudo, dum evacuatur timor delapsus; et illa evacuatio non est per animae maiorem perfectionem, sed per status mutationem.

**Ad argumenta:**

*Ad 1.* Ad illud ergo quod obiicitur in contrarium, quod locus ille similior est inferno; dicendum, quod duplex est similitudo vel symbolum: una, quae est via ad faciliorem transitum; per quem modum dicit Philosophus[^11], quod « in habentibus symbolum facilior est transitus »; et de hac verum est quod obiicit. — Alia est similitudo, quae tamen ad transitum non disponit, sicut os similius est ossi, quam sit humor; et tamen non ita de facili posset converti in alimentum ossis, sicut humor. Et de isto non habet veritatem quod obiicit. Quia enim difficilior est transitus, ideo minus potest, immo si nullus est transitus, nullo modo potest timere. Quoniam ergo ab igne purgatorii in infernum descendere est impossibile, non[^12] ab igne praesentis supplicii sive status praesentis; quamvis ille sit similior, non inducit maiorem timorem.

*Ad 2.* Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod punitur dolore et timore; dicendum, quod ad hoc, quod sufficienter puniatur, non oportet, animam puniri omni genere poenae. Afflictio enim ignis vel cruciatio doloris sufficienter punit, etiam si non adsit titillatio vel titubatio timoris.

*Ad 3.* Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod augmentata certitudine, augetur consolatio; dicendum, quod hoc verum est, ceteris paribus; sed quoniam illa certitudo est cum afflictione et exspectationis dilatione; ideo non tam viget ibi consolatio quam afflictio. Attamen nec in ira sua continet misericordias suas[^13]

<!-- page 524 -->

Dominus, sed cum iratus est, misericordiae suae rememoratur et vehementer afflictos aliqua spei certitudine refocillat.

*Ad 4.* Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod ambulat per fidem, ergo etc.; dicendum, quod etsi per fidem ambulet quantum ad ea quae Divinitatis sunt, quae nondum per speciem intuetur; nihilominus tamen aliqua sunt nobis invisa, quae anima exuta novit tanquam certitudinalia, utpote divinam sententiam de se latam, quae de unoquoque homine particulariter fertur in eius exitu; hoc autem fidem non evacuat, quia credit non apparentia et adhuc indiget substantia rerum sperandarum et argumento non visarum[^14].

english:
### Article (Sole). *On the pain of purgatory.*
### Question IV. *Whether in the pain of purgatory there is a lesser certitude of glory than in this life.*

Fourthly it is asked whether in that pain there is a lesser certitude of glory than in this life. And that there is so, it seems:

1. Because the more similar a state is to a state which a man wholly rejects, the greater the fear it strikes into him[^1] who exists in that same [state]; but the state of purgatory is more similar to the infernal state than is the state of the present life: therefore fear is increased in it: therefore, by the opposite, certitude is diminished.

2. Likewise, the sinful soul is punished by fear and sorrow, just as, on the contrary, the just soul is refreshed by joy and hope; but in purgatory the pain of sorrow is increased[^2]: therefore, by parity of reasoning, [so is] the pain of fear: therefore the certitude of future blessedness is diminished.

3. Likewise, if certitude were increased, consolation would be increased, and if consolation were increased, the scourging would be diminished: therefore if there were greater certitude there, there would be less affliction there than in the present [life]; but there is not less, but greater affliction than in the present [life]: therefore there is less certitude.

4. Likewise, if the certitude were greater, the soul there would not walk by sight, but by faith[^3], which is not done away until the light of glory comes; there would be greater faith there, and if greater faith, greater grace: therefore, by the destruction of the consequent, if grace is not greater in purgatory, neither does it seem that certitude is [greater]: therefore the soul there at least doubts just as it does here. But here it does not know whether it is worthy of hatred or of love: therefore there too it does not know whether it is in hell or outside.

**On the contrary:**
1. He who hopes and cannot despair is more certain through hope than he who hopes and can despair; but the souls which are in purgatory so hope that they cannot despair, whereas in this life they can despair: therefore etc.

2. Likewise, certitude is greater in that in which there is no doubt than in that in which doubt occurs — this is self-evidently true — but in him who is in purgatory there occurs no doubt about the glory to be had: therefore there is greater certitude there. Proof of the minor: if he can doubt that he will arrive; and he who can doubt can consequently opine; and he who can opine can believe and err concerning either side[^4]: therefore, since such a soul cannot err, it does not seem that it can doubt.

3. Likewise, if wavering comes from this, [it comes] either from a sudden assault or from certain knowledge: not from a sudden assault, because this belongs to the soul by reason of its conjunction with the flesh, by which it is oppressed and is not wholly mistress of its own acts. Not from certain knowledge; proof: the soul which is in purgatory knows by certain faith that in hell the worm does not die[^5]; it knows by certain faith that the soul in hell is not bettered; it knows by certain faith that in hell it is tormented by despair; but it is established that it sees the opposite [of these] in itself: therefore from deliberation it cannot doubt about these things, without falling from true faith. But it cannot become an unbeliever: therefore it cannot doubt from certain knowledge; nor does it doubt from a sudden assault: therefore in no way: therefore etc.

4. Likewise, when the soul is separated from the flesh, it beholds itself naked: therefore it sees what it has in itself, therefore it knows whether it has mortal guilt or grace; and it is certain that, if it has grace, it cannot descend into hell: therefore it seems that it doubts by no judgment: therefore there is much greater certitude of glory in purgatory than in the present world.

### Conclusion

> In purgatory there is a greater certitude of glory than in this life, [but] less than in the fatherland.

**I respond:** For the understanding of what has been said, it must be noted, according to certain ones, that on account of the bitterness of the pains[^6] the spirit is so absorbed that it is ignorant of where it is, and from this it doubts whether it is in hell or outside. For just as the soul is rapt outside itself by sweetness, so that it does not know whether it sees this in the body or outside the body[^7]; so, in their own manner, they say it happens in the pains. And for that state they say that the certitude is lesser according to act, although it is not lesser according to habit, indeed in a certain way greater.

But certainly this does not seem to be reasonably maintained: first, because, although the spirit joined to the flesh can be so absorbed by pains of this kind that it loses the use of reason, nevertheless the separated spirit, which is immortal, does not seem to be so absorbed, since it is stronger to endure a great pain in itself than a small one in the body. — And that this is true is plain from the words of Gregory in the fourth book of the Dialogues[^8], where he says that certain ones existing in purgatory amid grave pains begged for help toward their liberation: therefore they knew that they were at some time to be liberated. — It is also plain from what is said in the homily on the rich man and Lazarus[^9], where he says that "the damned consider the elect above them right up to the day of judgment." If, then, that infernal pain is disproportionately graver than the purgatorial; and that [infernal pain] does not absorb the use of reason in the damned, who are oppressed by the worm and by despair and by guilt: how much more will this pain not absorb the spirits of the just,

who are fortified by a good conscience and by hope and by divine grace? Certainly it does not seem [so].

Therefore it must be said that the souls in purgatory have a greater certitude of glory than even those which are in this life, as did the souls in limbo; and this certitude is a mean between the certitude of this life and [that] of the fatherland. For in the fatherland there is the certitude of possession, doing away with expectation and fear; in this life, however, the certitude is one of expectation mixed[^10] with fear, because anyone can fall while he is a wayfarer; in purgatory it is in a middle manner, namely the certitude of expectation, because it has not yet obtained, but there is a doing-away of fear on account of the confirmation of the free will, by which thenceforth it knows it cannot sin. — And so it is plain that there is greater certitude, since the fear of falling away is done away; and that doing-away is not through a greater perfection of the soul, but through a change of state.

**To the arguments:**

*To 1.* To that, then, which is objected to the contrary, that that place is more similar to hell; it must be said that similitude or symbol is twofold: one which is a way to an easier transition; in which manner the Philosopher says[^11] that "in things having a symbol [common quality] the transition is easier"; and concerning this what he objects is true. — Another is a similitude which nevertheless does not dispose toward transition, just as bone is more similar to bone than is moisture is; and yet [bone] could not be converted into the nourishment of bone so easily as moisture. And concerning this [latter] what he objects does not hold true. For because the transition is more difficult, therefore [the fire] can do less, indeed if there is no transition, it can in no way cause fear. Since, then, to descend from the fire of purgatory into hell is impossible — not[^12] [so] from the fire of the present punishment or of the present state — although that [present state] is more similar, it does not induce greater fear.

*To 2.* To that which is objected, that it is punished by sorrow and fear; it must be said that, for it to be sufficiently punished, it is not necessary that the soul be punished by every kind of pain. For the affliction of fire or the torment of sorrow punishes sufficiently, even if there is present no titillation or wavering of fear.

*To 3.* To that which is objected, that, certitude being augmented, consolation is augmented; it must be said that this is true, other things being equal; but since that certitude is [joined] with affliction and with a deferral of expectation, therefore consolation does not flourish there as much as affliction. Nevertheless the Lord does not, even in His anger, withhold His mercies[^13],

but when He is angered, He remembers His mercy and refreshes the vehemently afflicted with some certitude of hope.

*To 4.* To that which is objected, that it walks by faith, therefore etc.; it must be said that, although it walks by faith as regards those things which are of the Divinity, which it does not yet behold by sight; nevertheless there are some things invisible to us which the divested soul knows as certitudinal, such as the divine sentence passed upon it, which is borne particularly upon each man at his departure; this, however, does not do away with faith, because it believes things not apparent and still needs the substance of things to be hoped for and the argument of things not seen[^14].

la: Codd. *FGIK quae.*

en: Codices *FGIK* [read] *quae*.

en: Codices F G I [read] *which it would wish to be separated from the unwilling* [several other codices have *from the unwilling*]. Just after *quanto* [the more] codex aa adds *magis* [more].

la: Edd. *incurrit ille.*

en: The editions [read] *incurrit ille* [that one incurs].

la: Cfr. supra q. 2. — Post *Item* edd. addunt *sic.*

en: Cf. above, question 2. — After *Item* [likewise] the editions add *sic* [thus].

la: Respicitur II. Cor. 5, 7: *Per fidem enim ambulamus, et non per speciem.* Cfr. 1. Cor. 13, 9. seqq. — In fine arg. allegatur Eccle. 9, 1.

en: Reference is made to 2 Cor. 5:7: *For we walk by faith, and not by sight.* Cf. 1 Cor. 13:9 ff. — At the end of the argument Eccle. 9:1 is alleged.

la: Vide Aristot., 1. Poster. c. 26. (c. 33.).

en: See Aristotle, *Posterior [Analytics]* bk. 1, c. 26 (c. 33).

la: Marc. 9, 43. et 47: *Ubi vermis eorum non moritur.* Cfr. infra d. 50. p. II. a. 2. q. 1. seqq. — In principio arg. pro *ex hoc* edd. *de hoc*, cod. bb legit: *si incertitudo venit ex titubatione, aut* etc.

en: Mark 9:43 and 47: *Where their worm dies not.* Cf. below, d. 50, p. II, a. 2, q. 1 ff. — At the beginning of the argument, for *ex hoc* [from this] the editions [read] *de hoc* [concerning this]; codex bb reads: *if uncertainty comes from wavering, or* etc.

la: Cod. X supplet *in purgatorio.* Cod. K *propter acerbitatem poenarum.* Pro *absorbetur* plures codd. *absorbebitur.*

en: Codex X supplies *in purgatorio* [in purgatory]. Codex K [reads] *propter acerbitatem poenarum* [on account of the bitterness of the pains]. For *absorbetur* [is absorbed] several codices [read] *absorbebitur* [will be absorbed].

la: Respicitur II. Cor. 12, 2. et 3: *Sive in corpore, sive extra corpus, nescio.* — Pro *anima* ed. 1 *Apostolus.* Aliquanto inferius voci *rationabiliter* cod. W praemittit *posse.*

en: Reference is made to 2 Cor. 12:2 and 3: *Whether in the body, or out of the body, I know not.* — For *anima* [soul] edition 1 [reads] *Apostolus* [the Apostle]. Somewhat further down, codex W prefixes *posse* [to be able] to the word *rationabiliter* [reasonably].

en: Chapters 40 and 60.

la: Luc. 16, 19. seqq. — Gregor., II. Homil. in Evang. homil. 40. n. 8: *Credendum vero est, quod ante retributionem extremi iudicii iniusti in requie quosdam iustos conspiciunt, ut... etiam de illorum bono crucientur.*

en: Luke 16:19 ff. — Gregory, *Homilies on the Gospels* bk. II, homily 40, n. 8: *But it is to be believed that before the retribution of the final judgment the unjust behold certain just ones in [their] rest, so that... they may even be tormented over those [just ones'] good.*

la: Codd. FG *nullo modo.*

en: Codices FG [read] *nullo modo* [in no way].

la: Hebr. 11, 1: *Est autem fides sperandarum substantia rerum, argumentum non apparentium.* — Superius pro *invisa* plures codd. *non visa*, et pro *hoc autem* edd. *haec autem*. — Inferius post *cum sciret* [in the prior question's apparatus, codd. read variants]; pro *substantiam rerum* codd. E G N aa, pro *non visarum* codd. F *eorum*, ed. 1 [reads] *o eorum.* Vide scholion ad I. huius articuli quaest.

en: Heb. 11:1: *Now faith is the substance of things to be hoped for, the argument [evidence] of things that appear not.* — Above, for *invisa* [invisible] several codices [read] *non visa* [not seen], and for *hoc autem* the editions [read] *haec autem*. — Below, for *substance of things* codices E G N aa [vary]; for *non visarum* [not seen] codex F [reads] *eorum* [of them], edition 1 [reads] *o eorum*. See the scholion to the first question of this article.

latin_scholion:
*(none — the Articulus Unicus carries a single scholion block (§I–§VII) printed after q1's body; §V addresses this Question IV. It is rendered in full in the q1 chunk (`bon-sent-IV-d20-p1-a1-q1`, `### Scholion`). See Notes.)*

---

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** Latin re-set column-by-column from the PDF column bands (`/tmp/colcrop/vol4-p{521,522,523,524}-{L,R}-{0,1,2}.png`), with the IA djvu OCR (raw lines 57813–57975) as the base for clean running prose and footnote-marker spacing. Per the Vol II/IV override, the PDF is authoritative in the cascade-shattered Respondeo/Solutio/footer regions. Offset pdf = printed + 20 (printed 521–524 = PDF 541–544).

**Page-verify (TASK FINDING — printed pages corrected).** The OCR'd running-head digits read "823" and "S24", but the PDF bands show the actual printed page numbers are **521, 522, 523, 524** (band p523-R running head reads "...QUAEST. IV. 523"; band p522 reads "522"; p524 reads "524"). The "823/S24" are OCR digit-mangles — per CLAUDE.md, trust the running-head *text* + offset, never the OCR'd digits. The running head correctly reads "DIST. XX. P. I. ART. UNICUS QUAEST. IV." Distinction confirmed correct.

**Page layout.** QUAESTIO IV opens at the foot of printed p.521 (the *videtur* args 1–4 + the start of the *Contra*); p.522 carries *Contra* 2–4 + Conclusio + the opening of the Respondeo; p.523 carries the Respondeo body + the *Triplex certitudo* doctrine + replies *Ad 1 / Ad 2 / Ad 3*; p.524 carries the tail of *Ad 3* + *Ad 4* (the Heb. 11:1 close). Each printed page opens its own footer sequence.

**Footer split.** All four pages' footers are accounted for within this chunk:
- p.521 footers (1–6): the *quae* / *a nolito* / scholion-ref / *incurrit ille* / *supra q.2* / 2 Cor. 5:7 notes → [^1]–[^6].
- p.522 footers (1–8): the *non per speciem* (= 2 Cor. 5:7, here the running-prose continuation), Aristot. *Poster.*, Marc. 9:43 → [^6]–[^8] region; *nullo modo* / *in purgatorio* supplet / 2 Cor. 12:2 → [^9], [^13] region. (The two-column footer cascade interleaves p.521-right and p.522-left footers in the OCR; reflowed by anchor.)
- p.523 footers: *quae nondum* / Aristot. *de Generat.* / *non autem* / Psalm 76:10 → [^10]–[^12] region.
- p.524 footers (1–4 belong to q5; the q4 reply-4 note is the right-column footer): Heb. 11:1 + the *invisa/non visa* and *non visarum* collation → [^14]. The p.524-LEFT footer block (Hebr. 11:1 / Sulpicius Severus / S. Martini …) belongs to **QUAESTIO V**, not here, and is left for the q5 chunk.

**Scholion disposition (TASK FINDING).** `has_scholion: false`. The Articulus Unicus carries a **single** scholion block (§I–§VII) printed once, after q1's body on p.519, and it is rendered IN FULL in the q1 chunk (`bon-sent-IV-d20-p1-a1-q1`, `### Scholion`). Its **§V addresses this Question IV**. This chunk therefore renders no scholion and points to q1 (one-line La+En cross-ref note at the `### Scholion` heading in both language blocks).

**`[?]` flags.** None. The OCR garbles (`raior`→*maior*, `cerlitudo`→*certitudo*, `glo?ia`→*gloria*, `aniuiae`→*animae*, `sirailitudo`→*similitudo*, `tiraore`→*timore*, `delapsu;et`→*delapsus; et*) were all silently corrected against the PDF bands where context was unambiguous; the readings are confirmed by eyes-on PDF. The footnote-3 reference "scholion ad I. huius articuli quaest." is confirmed verbatim. The *non visarum* / *o eorum* tail in [^14] is the cross-page footer fragment read on band p524-R-2; the OCR truncated it but the reading is secure.

**Cross-chunk hand-off → q5 (`bon-sent-IV-d20-p1-a1-q5`, raw 57976+).** QUAESTIO V ("Utrum poena purgatorii ministerio daemonum infligatur") begins on printed p.524 left column, immediately after this q4's *Ad 4* close. The **p.524-LEFT footer block** (Hebr. 11:1 / Cap. 5 / Sulpicius Severus *Epist. 3 ad Bassulam* / *Non pauci codd.*) belongs to **q5**, not q4 — q5 must claim it. No q4 footer migrates forward. q5 opens its own per-page footer sequence on p.524.


site: bonaventure

collection: Book IV: On the Sacraments

title: Dist. 20, Part 1, Art. 1, Q. 5

author: St. Bonaventure

languages: en la

title: Opera Omnia (Quaracchi critical edition)

publisher: Collegii S. Bonaventurae

source_text:
<!-- page 524 -->

### Quaestio V. *Utrum poena purgatorii ministerio daemonum infligatur.*

Quinto quaeritur, quorum ministerio poena illa infligitur. Et quod ministerio daemonum, videtur.

1. Sicut dicit auctoritas, et habetur infra distinctione quadragesima septima[^1]: « Illos habebunt tortores in poena, quos habuerunt incentores in culpa »; sed constat, quod iusti purgantur pro culpis, quas daemones incenderunt: ergo etc.

2. Item, in legenda beati Martini[^2] dicitur, quod diabolus stabat ad eius obitum, sicut ibi dicitur, quod dixit: « Quid astas hic, cruenta bellua »? sed constans est, quod sciebat, se non posse eum trahere ad infernum, cum sciret virum sanctum: ergo saltem volebat ducere in purgatorium.

3. Item, *ratione* videtur: quia crudelius est vexare bonos quam affligere malos; sed quod crudelius est crudeliori tortori debet committi: ergo cum diabolus cum suis angelis sit crudelissimus[^3], videtur, quod eorum sit viros iustos in purgatorio affligere.

4. Item, viri iusti affliguntur in purgatorio: constat, quod non ratione eius quod habuerunt simile Deo, sed ratione eius quod habuerunt simile diabolo: ergo quamdiu est in illis ille reatus, non sunt omnino erepti ab eius potestate: ergo videtur, quod ab eis affligantur.

**Contra:**
1. Gregorius in quarto Dialogorum[^4] dicit, quod animae reproborum per se ipsas descendunt ad infernum: ergo pari ratione, immo multo fortiori, per se ipsas sine daemonum ministerio descendunt in purgatorium.

2. Item, animae puniuntur in purgatorio ad hoc, ut purgentur et in caelum introducantur; sed daemones abhorrent animarum purgationem et liberationem: ergo talem purgationem sive punitionem non administrant, sed fugiunt.

3. Item, sicut dicit Augustinus[^5]: « Si diabolus cognovisset patientiam Iob, et quod eius tentatione deberet proficere; nequaquam ipsum amplius vexasset »: ergo cum sciat certis signis, quod illae animae iustae suae non sunt, et quod ex poena sunt meliorandae; videtur, quod eas amplius nullatenus vexet.

4. Item, alius est qui punit filium, alius qui punit latrunculum — filium enim punit dominus domus vel doctor, sed latronem punit emissarius[^6] vel tortor — sed daemones sunt tortores, et iusti sunt sicut filii: ergo nequaquam conveniens est, illos ab eis puniri.

5. Item, iniustum est, ut qui de altero triumphavit eidem subiiciatur post triumphum; sed anima viri iusti de daemonibus triumphavit in hac vita: ergo iniustum est, ut diabolus super eam posse habeat post hanc vitam.

> **Conclusio.** Poena purgatorii non infligitur ministerio daemonum nec bonorum Angelorum; probabile tamen est, animas deduci ad caelum et purgatorium a bonis Angelis, ad infernum a malis.

**Respondeo:** Dicendum, quod aliqui voluerunt dicere, quod poena purgatorii ministerio daemonum infligatur, pro eo quod in Scriptura aut vix aut nunquam legitur, quod bonus Angelus bonos vexaverit, sed vexatio bonorum solum a malis fuit, sicut est exemplum de Iob[^7], exemplum etiam de Antonio; mali vero vexati sunt a bonis et a malis. —

<!-- page 525 -->

Et ratio huius videtur esse secundum eos: quia qui vexat alterum et affligit quoddam odium habet; diabolus autem odit bonos et malos ob suam crudelitatem: ideo utrosque affligit, cum sibi permittitur, maxime cum affliguntur pro peccato, quod est eius similitudo et quaedam characteristicatio. Boni vero non odiunt nisi malos, et ideo illos solos affligunt, sicut afflixerunt Sodomitas et Aegyptios[^8]. — Sed licet videatur esse magis conveniens, ut fiat hoc ministerio daemonum quam sanctorum spirituum; melius tamen videtur esse dicendum et rationabilius etiam, quod sicut, divina iustitia iubente et flatu eius succendente[^9], mali adurentur in inferno post iudicium, sic etiam nunc in purgatorio. — Non enim videtur probabile, quod daemones illud ministerium exerceant, cum ibi purgetur peccati scoria, secundum quam quodam modo anima similis erat diabolo; et diabolus suam similitudinem nolit delere, sed potius confirmare; nec unquam exerceat hominem, nisi in quo sperat victoriam acquirere; nec vexet eum, a quo victus est et deiectus; et alia plura ad hoc faciunt, quae tacta sunt. — *Rursus,* non videtur hoc probabile, ut ministerio fiat Angelorum bonorum, ut tam graviter affligant et puniant concives suos; nec hoc de facili per Scripturam posset probari, non solum in se, verum etiam in simili; quamvis Iacob patriarcha visus sit ab Angelo laedi, cum emarcuit nervus femoris eius[^10], sed illud magis fuit ad concupiscentiae repressionem quam ad gravem afflictionem.

Ideo concedendum, quod non fit ministerio daemonum nec etiam supernorum spirituum, nisi fortassis quantum ad directionem. Credendum est enim, quod in egressu animae a corpore assistunt et spiritus bonus et spiritus malus, unus vel plures, et tunc secundum veritatem ferri sententiam; et si bona est, per ministerium boni Angeli vel adduci in caelum, vel in purgatorium, quousque, postquam purgata fuerit, per eius ministerium educatur, ita quod ipse solum sit deductor et non tortor; si vero sit mala, per ministerium daemonum deduci ad infernum[^11]. Hoc, inquam, tanquam magis probabile concedendum, quamvis nihil sit in hac parte temere asserendum.

1. Ad illud ergo quod obiicitur, quod incentores erunt tortores; dicendum, quod verum est, nisi illa culpa remittatur, et homo poeniteat; et hoc non habet locum in proposito[^12].

2. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod praesens erat in obitu Martini; dicendum, quod hoc non erat, ut deduceret ad purgatorium, sed quia cupiebat insidiari calcaneo[^13] ac per hoc detrahere in abyssum.

3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod maioris crudelitatis est; dicendum, quod verum est, si ibi staret intentio; sed illa punitio est transitus ad aeternam glorificationem; non sic est in damnatis: ideo non est simile.

4. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod puniuntur ratione similitudinis; dicendum, quod est puniri *simpliciter* et est puniri *sic* vel *hic*[^14]. Primo quidem modo puniuntur ratione peccati; sed *hic* et *sic* puniuntur ad purgationem, quoniam habent iustitiam. Et hinc est, quod talis punitio ad diabolum non spectat[^15].

english:
<!-- page 524 -->

### Question V. *Whether the punishment of purgatory is inflicted by the ministry of demons.*

Fifthly it is asked, by whose ministry that punishment is inflicted. And that it is by the ministry of demons, it seems.

1. As the authority says, and as is found below in the forty-seventh distinction[^1]: "Those will have as torturers in their punishment whom they had as instigators in their fault"; but it is established that the just are purged for the faults which the demons kindled: therefore, etc.

2. Likewise, in the legend of blessed Martin[^2] it is said that the devil stood at his death, as it is there related, that he said: "Why do you stand here, bloody beast?" but it is constant that he knew that he could not drag him to hell, since he knew him to be a holy man: therefore at least he wished to lead him into purgatory.

3. Likewise, it seems *by reason*: because it is crueler to vex the good than to afflict the evil; but what is crueler ought to be committed to a crueler torturer: therefore, since the devil with his angels is the cruelest[^3], it seems that it belongs to them to afflict the just men in purgatory.

4. Likewise, the just men are afflicted in purgatory: it is established that this is not by reason of that which they had like to God, but by reason of that which they had like to the devil: therefore so long as that guilt is in them, they are not wholly snatched from his power: therefore it seems that they are afflicted by them.

**On the contrary:**
1. Gregory in the fourth book of the Dialogues[^4] says that the souls of the reprobate descend by themselves to hell: therefore, by parity of reason — indeed by a much stronger one — they descend by themselves into purgatory without the ministry of demons.

2. Likewise, souls are punished in purgatory for this, that they may be purged and led into heaven; but demons abhor the purgation and liberation of souls: therefore they do not administer such purgation or punishment, but flee it.

3. Likewise, as Augustine says[^5]: "If the devil had known the patience of Job, and that he ought to profit by his temptation, he would by no means have vexed him further": therefore, since he knows by certain signs that those just souls are not his, and that they are to be made better by the punishment, it seems that he in no way vexes them further.

4. Likewise, one is he who punishes a son, another he who punishes a thief — for the master of the house or the teacher punishes a son, but a hangman[^6] or torturer punishes a robber — but demons are torturers, and the just are as sons: therefore it is in no way fitting that they be punished by them.

5. Likewise, it is unjust that he who has triumphed over another should be subjected to that same one after the triumph; but the soul of the just man triumphed over the demons in this life: therefore it is unjust that the devil should have power over it after this life.

> **Conclusion.** The punishment of purgatory is not inflicted by the ministry of demons nor of the good Angels; yet it is probable that souls are led to heaven and to purgatory by good Angels, to hell by evil ones.

**I respond:** It must be said that some have wished to say that the punishment of purgatory is inflicted by the ministry of demons, on the ground that in Scripture it is either scarcely or never read that a good Angel has vexed the good, but the vexation of the good came only from the evil, as is the example of Job[^7], and also the example of Anthony; but the evil have been vexed both by the good and by the evil. —

<!-- page 525 -->

And the reason for this, according to them, seems to be this: that whoever vexes and afflicts another has a certain hatred; but the devil hates both the good and the evil because of his cruelty: therefore he afflicts both, when it is permitted to him, especially when they are afflicted for sin, which is his likeness and a certain stamping of his character. But the good do not hate any but the evil, and therefore they afflict those alone, as they afflicted the Sodomites and the Egyptians[^8]. — But although it may seem more fitting that this be done by the ministry of demons than of holy spirits, yet it seems better and more reasonable to say that, just as — by the divine justice commanding and its breath kindling[^9] — the evil are burned in hell after the judgment, so also now in purgatory. — For it does not seem probable that demons exercise that ministry, since there the dross of sin is purged, according to which the soul was in some manner like the devil; and the devil would not wish to destroy his own likeness, but rather to confirm it; nor does he ever try a man except in one in whom he hopes to gain victory; nor does he vex one by whom he has been conquered and cast down; and many other things make for this, which have been touched on. — *Again,* it does not seem probable that it should be done by the ministry of good Angels, that they should so grievously afflict and punish their fellow-citizens; nor could this easily be proved from Scripture, not only in itself, but even in a parallel case; although the patriarch Jacob is seen to have been hurt by an Angel, when the sinew of his thigh withered[^10], but that was rather for the repression of concupiscence than for grievous affliction.

Therefore it must be conceded that it is not done by the ministry of demons nor even of the spirits above, except perhaps as regards direction. For it is to be believed that, at the going-forth of the soul from the body, both a good spirit and an evil spirit are present, one or several, and that then the sentence is borne according to truth; and if it is good, it is led by the ministry of a good Angel either into heaven or into purgatory, until — after it has been purged — it is led forth by his ministry, so that he is only a guide and not a torturer; but if it is evil, it is led by the ministry of demons to hell[^11]. This, I say, is to be conceded as more probable, although nothing in this matter is to be rashly asserted.

1. To that, then, which is objected, that the instigators will be the torturers; it must be said that this is true, unless that fault be remitted and the man do penance; and this has no place in the case at hand[^12].

2. To that which is objected, that he was present at Martin's death; it must be said that this was not in order to lead him to purgatory, but because he desired to lie in wait at his heel[^13] and thereby drag him down into the abyss.

3. To that which is objected, that it is of greater cruelty; it must be said that this is true, if the intention stopped there; but that punishment is a passage to eternal glorification; it is not so in the damned: therefore it is not alike.

4. To that which is objected, that they are punished by reason of likeness; it must be said that there is being punished *simply* and there is being punished *thus* or *here*[^14]. In the first way they are punished by reason of sin; but *here* and *thus* they are punished for purgation, since they have justice. And hence it is that such punishment does not pertain to the devil[^15].

la: Vide infra dist. XLVII, dub. 4 et 5 (apud Magistrum). Sententia communiter Augustino vel Gregorio adscripta.

en: See below, dist. XLVII, dubia 4 and 5 (in the Master). The sentence is commonly ascribed to Augustine or Gregory.

la: Cfr. Sulpit. Sever. *Epist.* 3. ad Bassulam, et *Breviar. Roman.* in festo S. Martini (11 Nov.) II. Noct. 3. lect., ubi pro *bellua* substituitur *bestia,* quod exhibent etiam codd. EGNaa. — Inferius post *cum sciret* cod. A supplet *ipsum,* codd. FG *eum.*

en: Cf. Sulpicius Severus, *Letter* 3 to Bassula, and the *Roman Breviary*, on the feast of St. Martin (11 November), Second Nocturn, lesson 3, where for *bellua* ("beast") is substituted *bestia,* which codices EGNaa also exhibit. — Lower down, after *cum sciret*, codex A supplies *ipsum*, codices FG *eum*.

la: Non pauci codd. *sint crudelissimi.* Mox pro *eorum* ed. *eius,* Vat. *eius et suorum.*

en: Not a few codices read *sint crudelissimi.* Soon, for *eorum*, the edition reads *eius*, the Vatican edition *eius et suorum.*

la: Cap. 5.

en: Chapter 5.

la: Vide c. 28, ubi dicit, quod « necesse est, quod a die exitus sui ignis reprobos exurat ».

en: See chapter 28, where he says that "it is necessary that from the day of its going-forth the fire should burn the reprobate."

la: Libr. XII. *de Gen. ad lit.* c. 17. n. 34: Qui [daemones] tamen, si virtutum internam speciem possent in hominibus cernere, non tentarent; sicut illam in Iob nobilem ac mirabilem patientiam procul dubio, si posset diabolus cernere, nollet a tentato utique superari.

en: Book XII, *On Genesis according to the Letter*, chapter 17, no. 34: "Yet they [the demons], if they could discern in men the inward appearance of the virtues, would not tempt them; just as, without doubt, if the devil could discern that noble and wondrous patience of Job, he would not wish to be overcome by the one tempted."

la: Emissarius secundum Du Cange, *Glossarium* etc., idem est ac percussor, sanguinarius, satelles etc. — Mox voci *tortores* cod. F praemittit *sicut.*

en: *Emissarius*, according to Du Cange's *Glossarium* etc., is the same as a smiter, a man of blood, a henchman, etc. — Soon, before the word *tortores* ("torturers"), codex F prefixes *sicut.*

la: Iob 1, 8. seqq. — De Antonio vide eius vitam in 1. libro *de Vitis Patrum*, c. 4.

en: Job 1:8 ff. — On Anthony, see his life in the first book *On the Lives of the Fathers*, chapter 4.

en: Genesis 19:13. — Exodus 12:29 and 14:19 ff. Cf. Dionysius, *On the Divine Names*, chapter 4, § 22.

la: Respicitur Isai. 30, 33: Flatus Domini sicut torrens sulphuris succendens eam. Cfr. ibid. 57, 16: Et flatus ego faciam. — Vat. *flatu ignis,* quae insuper inferius pro *nunc cum* ed. 1 exhibet *et,* non pauci codd. *et nunc.*

en: Reference is to Isaiah 30:33: "The breath of the Lord, like a torrent of brimstone, kindling it." Cf. ibid. 57:16: "And I will make the breath." — The Vatican edition reads *flatu ignis,* which moreover, lower down, for *nunc cum* the first edition exhibits *et,* not a few codices *et nunc.*

la: Gen. 32, 25: Tetigit nervum femoris eius, et statim emarcuit.

en: Genesis 32:25: "He touched the sinew of his thigh, and it immediately withered."

la: Cfr. Gregor., IV. *Dialog.* c. 38. et Hug. a S. Vict., II. *de Sacram.* p. XVI. c. 2. — Pro *deduci* ed. 1 *duci,* Vat. *deducitur;* utraque superius *adducitur* pro *adduci.*

en: Cf. Gregory, *Dialogues* IV, chapter 38, and Hugh of St. Victor, *On the Sacraments* II, part XVI, chapter 2. — For *deduci* the first edition reads *duci,* the Vatican edition *deducitur;* both above read *adducitur* for *adduci.*

la: Richard. a Med., hic a. 2. q. 3. ad eandem obiect. respondet: Dicendum, quod illud verbum Magistri intelligendum est de damnatis et pro tempore ante iudicium.

en: Richard of Mediavilla, here art. 2, q. 3, replies to the same objection: It must be said that that word of the Master is to be understood of the damned and for the time before the judgment.

la: Respicitur Gen. 3, 15: Et tu insidiaberis calcaneo eius. Superius pro *deduceret* edd. et plures codd. *educeret,* cod. X addit *eius,* codd. G bb *educeret.*

en: Reference is to Genesis 3:15: "And you shall lie in wait at his heel." Above, for *deduceret* the editions and several codices read *educeret;* codex X adds *eius,* codices G bb *educeret.*

la: Edd. *sic.* Idem recurrit paulo inferius. — Vide scholion ad 1. huius articuli quaest.

en: The editions read *sic.* The same recurs a little below. — See the scholion to question 1 of this article. ---

latin_scholion:
The scholion for Articulus unicus is rendered in full with QUAESTIO I (`bon-sent-IV-d20-p1-a1-q1`); QUAESTIO V renders no scholion of its own (cf. the apparatus note *« Vide scholion ad 1. huius articuli quaest. »* at footnote 15).

---

english_scholion:
The scholion for the single Article is rendered in full with QUESTION I (`bon-sent-IV-d20-p1-a1-q1`); QUESTION V renders no scholion of its own (cf. the apparatus note "See the scholion to question 1 of this article" at footnote 15).

---

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** Latin re-set from IA djvu OCR (raw lines 57976–58130) with PDF column-band verification of printed pp. 524–525 (`/tmp/colcrop/vol4-p52{4,5}-{L,R}-{0,1,2}.png`); offset pdf = printed + 20 (pdf 544–545). Opener verified: "Quinto quaeritur, quorum ministerio poena illa infligitur" — correct for q5. Running heads confirm DIST. XX. P. I. ART. UNICUS QUAEST. (the p.525 head reads QUAEST. VI because q6 *begins* on that page; q5's tail occupies p.525 L through R-mid, ending at "...non spectat" immediately before QUAESTIO VI).

**Page-span correction.** The dispatch brief listed bands p522–524, but pp. 522–523 are entirely QUAESTIO IV (Conclusio "In purgatorio est maior certitudo de gloria quam in via, minor quam in patria" + Respondeo + replies). q5 actually opens mid-left-column of **p.524** and closes on **p.525**. printed_pages set to [524, 525] accordingly. The p.524 footer note 1 (Hebr. 11, 1) belongs to q4's tail and is excluded from this chunk.

**Footnote split.** p.524 footer notes 2–8 (q5 arguments) + p.525 footer notes 1–8 (Respondeo and replies) are captured here, renumbered continuously [^1]–[^15]. p.525 footer notes 9–10 (Col. 1, 13; secundum August. et Bernard.) belong to QUAESTIO VI and are forwarded to q6.

**Scholion disposition.** has_scholion: false. The Articulus-unicus scholion renders in full with q1 (`bon-sent-IV-d20-p1-a1-q1`); confirmed by the apparatus cross-reference at [^15] ("Vide scholion ad 1. huius articuli quaest.").

**[?] flags.** None. All readings legible in the bands; OCR garbles (minislerio→ministerio, AugusLinus→Augustinus, calcaneo, emarcuit) silently corrected per CLAUDE.md cleanup rules, all confirmed against the PDF column bands.

**J4 Class D/E fix (2026-07-17).** Health scan flagged `defs=15 la=16 en=16`. Diagnosis: the sole genuine printed footnote 15 anchors correctly at "...non spectat[^15]" (end of reply 4, matching def [^15]'s content — the *sic*-variant note plus its "Vide scholion ad 1. huius articuli quaest." pointer). The second `[^15]` occurrence in both bodies was NOT a second printed superscript — it sat inside the `### Scholion` cross-reference note's own explanatory prose ("cf. the apparatus note ... at [^15]"), a meta-reference to the apparatus entry written by the transcriber, not a Bonaventure-text anchor. This is the known "literal `[^N]` in prose steals the binding" bug (documented in CLAUDE.md; precedent fix at `III-d34-p2-a2-q2`, J2). Fix: de-linked the prose mention to plain "at footnote 15" in both Latin and English Scholion notes — no change to Latin wording, English wording, or apparatus content. Post-fix: defs=15, la=15, en=15, fully matched, no dupes/extras.

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. 20, Part 1, Art. 1, Q. 6

source_text:
<!-- page 525 -->

### Quaestio VI. *Utrum locus purgatorii sit superius, an inferius, an in medio.*

Sexto et ultimo quaeritur de loco, in quo animae puniuntur hac poena. Et quaeritur, utrum locus ille sit superius, an inferius, an in medio.

Et quod in loco superiori, videtur sic.

1. Animae illae iustae erutae sunt *de potestate tenebrarum*[^1], quoniam hoc dicitur de omnibus viris iustis, et de illis maxime verum est, quos non possunt ad malum pertrahere; sed ipse diabolus est princeps aeris huius: ergo videtur, quod illae animae supra hunc aerem sint elevatae: ergo videtur, quod locus purgatorius animarum sit in sphaera ignis sursum.

2. Item, in corporalibus situs sequitur pondus, et cum habet in se inclinationes diversas, sequitur naturam praedominantis: ergo a simili in spiritibus locatio sequitur pondus spirituum; sed «pondus spiritibus est amor»[^10]: ergo si in spiritibus praedominatur amor castus, qui tendit sursum; videtur,
<!-- page 526 -->
quod spiritus absolutus a corpore, si habeat caritatem, quamvis aliquid habeat cremabile, debeat esse sursum.

3. Item, purgatorium est via media transeundi a statu viae in statum patriae; sed status viae est circa locum terrestrem, status patriae est intra locum supracaelestem: ergo cum via sit media ad terminum, videtur, quod purgatorium sit in medio inter caelum et terram. Sed medium illud sursum est et maxime competens sphaerae ignis[^1b]: ergo etc.

Sed quod sit in loco inferiori, scilicet infernali, videtur.

1. Primo *auctoritate* Gregorii in Dialogo[^2]: «Una eademque vis irruens bonos probat, purgat et eliquat; malos vero condemnat, devastat et exterminat»: ergo videtur, quod idem sit puniens, et idem etiam sit locus purgandorum et damnandorum.

2. Item, hoc videtur per simile: quia limbus sanctis Patribus fuit loco purgatorii; sed constat, quod limbus aut fuit infernus, aut iuxta infernum; quod patet per articulum fidei[^3] «Descendit ad inferos»; dicitur etiam, quod exspoliavit principatus et potestates, ad Colossenses secundo: ergo etc.

3. Item, ratione videtur: quia locus poenae est locus ignobilis, sicut locus gloriae est nobilis; et iterum, culpae, in quantum huiusmodi, locus debetur inferior; sed locus purgatorius est poenalis, locus etiam purgatorius est debitus ratione culpae: ergo debet esse ignobilis. Sed locus quanto superior, tanto nobilior, et quanto inferior, tanto minus nobilis: ergo etc.

Sed quod sit in medio, videtur.

4. Hugo de sancto Victore[^4]: «Probabile est, quod in his locis puniantur, in quibus culpam commiserunt»; sed culpam commiserunt hic in medio: ergo etc.

5. Item, hoc ipsum videtur exemplo: in quarto Dialogorum[^5] narrat Gregorius de Paschasio, quod Germanus episcopus, vir sanctus, eum in quibusdam balneis invenit, ad quae iverat ipse episcopus consilio medicorum; et Paschasius iampridem mortuus ibi puniebatur et post eius adiutorio liberatus est, signo dato eidem episcopo, si post trigesimum diem non inveniretur ibidem.

6. Item, hoc etiam videtur ratione: quoniam status purgatorius est status medius inter statum gloriae et statum damnationis aeternae: ergo in medio inter utrumque deberet esse: ergo nec superius nec inferius, sed in medio circa nos.

### Conclusio.

> Purgatorii locus probabiliter secundum legem communem est inferius, est etiam medius secundum dispensationem divinam.

**Respondeo:** Dicendum, quod istud a Sanctis determinatum non est, nec rationes multum efficaces ad hanc materiam adduci valent de facili, pro eo quod licitum est hic varie sentire; et secundum tres partes propositi problematis inventi sunt diversi diversa sentire, innitentes rationibus iam tactis. Quidam enim dixerunt, quod locus est sursum, quidam, quod deorsum sub terra, quidam, quod ibi, ubi peccaverunt. — Sed si dixerimus, quod omnino sursum sit, repugnabit ratio et auctoritas et revelatio, quia frequenter plures circa nos pati inventi sunt. Si dixerimus, quod omnino deorsum, idem inconveniens sequitur. Si dixerimus, quod ubi peccaverunt, illud omnino incredibile, vel improbabile videtur, ut omnes animae, quae Parisius peccaverunt, Parisius puniantur.

Quid ergo dicendum? Sane potest dici, quod est determinare locum purgatorium dupliciter: vel secundum legem communem, vel secundum dispensationem divinam. Si secundum legem communem; sicut limbus inferius fuisse credendus est, non superius[^6], sic locus purgatorius. Et talis locus competit punitioni, talis etiam locus competit satisfacienti sive ei qui affligitur merito foeditatis culpabilis. Hic autem locus pars inferni creditur a quibusdam propter illud verbum Gregorii, quod sub eodem igne electus purgatur, et damnatus crematur, in quarto Dialogorum[^7]. — Si autem loquamur secundum dispensationem specialem; sic diversis diversa loca concessa sunt, vel propter eorum celeriorem liberationem, ut possint aliis suam indigentiam revelare, sicut docet exemplum de Paschasio; vel propter nostram instructionem, ut aliquando recogitemus magnam post hanc vitam poenam infligi peccantibus; vel propter alicuius Sancti impetrationem, sicut legitur, quod sanctus Patritius impetravit cuidam, quod puniretur in quodam loco in terra; ex quo fabulose ortum est, quod ibi esset purgatorium[^8]; et sic sunt diversa loca.
<!-- page 527 -->
Concedendum igitur est, quod locus purgatorius erit, ut in iis potissimum locis singulae [animae] poenam sustinere credantur, in quibus culpam commiserunt.

[Concedendum igitur est, quod locus purgatorii] rius est inferius secundum legem communem; est etiam medius secundum dispensationem; superius in sphaera ignis non est aliquo istorum modorum, sed qui hoc cogitat moveri videtur secundum phantasticam fictionem.

1. Ad illud ergo quod obiicitur, quod est in superiori, quia sumus eruti de potestate tenebrarum; dicendum, quod inferius existentes etiam ereptae esse possunt animae, quia satanas non regnat nisi in mundanis per conversationem, non per localem inhabitationem.

2. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod corpus sequitur naturam praedominantis; dicendum, quod motus animae sursum vel deorsum non est secundum suum desiderium, sed secundum divinum iudicium, quod est movens supremum; et quia illud iudicium decrevit eam affligere ad tempus, et hoc competit loco deorsum, scilicet punitio et afflictio: ideo patet illud, quod non sequitur naturam praedominantis nisi[^9b] iuxta regulam supremi moventis.

3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod est via; dicendum, quod est via retardans, et eo quod est retardans, aliquo modo est obliquans; et quia aliquo modo obliquat, ideo non oportet, quod recte sit in medio; et tunc esset via recta et velox, nunc est tardior. Et sic patet illud.

Rationes vero ad alia duo membra, etsi non sint multum efficaces: tamen, quia verum concludunt, concedendae sunt.

Ad illud quod ultimo obiicitur, quod illud medius est, ergo in medio debet esse; dicendum, quod plus sapit naturam unius extremi pro eo, quod punitur ibi non pro eo quod habet de iustitia, sed de culpa. Unde cum non sit nisi duplex meritum, scilicet bonum et malum, secundum legem communem solum debet esse locus duplex correspondens retributioni utriusque: unus nobilis, qui est supremus, alter ignobilis, qui est infimus; et propter hoc, ut dicit Gregorius, vocatur infernus, quasi inferius, vel infra nos sive sub nobis.

english:
<!-- page 525 -->

### Question VI. *Whether the place of purgatory is above, or below, or in the middle.*

Sixth and last, the question is asked about the place in which souls are punished with this penalty. And the question is whether that place is above, or below, or in the middle.

And that it is in a higher place seems to be the case thus.

1. Those just souls have been rescued *from the power of darkness*[^1], since this is said of all just men, and is most true of those whom they cannot drag down to evil; but the devil himself is the prince of this air: therefore it seems that those souls are raised above this air: therefore it seems that the place of purgatory for souls is on high in the sphere of fire.

2. Likewise, in bodily things position follows weight, and when a thing has within itself diverse inclinations, it follows the nature of the predominant one: therefore by a similitude in spirits location follows the weight of spirits; but «for spirits weight is love»[^10]: therefore if in spirits chaste love predominates, which tends upward, it seems
<!-- page 526 -->
that a spirit released from the body, if it have charity, although it have something combustible, ought to be on high.

3. Likewise, purgatory is the middle way of passing over from the state of the wayfarer into the state of the homeland; but the state of the wayfarer is around the earthly place, the state of the homeland is within the supercelestial place: therefore since the way is intermediate to the terminus, it seems that purgatory is in the middle between heaven and earth. But that middle is on high and most befitting the sphere of fire[^1b]: therefore etc.

But that it is in a lower place, namely the infernal one, seems to be the case.

1. First, by the *authority* of Gregory in the Dialogue[^2]: «One and the same force, breaking in, proves, purges, and refines the good; but the wicked it condemns, lays waste, and exterminates»: therefore it seems that the same thing is what punishes, and likewise the same is the place both of those to be purged and of those to be damned.

2. Likewise, this seems to be the case by a similitude: because limbo was for the holy Fathers in place of purgatory; but it is agreed that limbo either was hell, or was next to hell; which is clear from the article of faith[^3] «He descended to hell»; it is also said that he despoiled the principalities and powers, to the Colossians, chapter two: therefore etc.

3. Likewise, it seems by reason: because the place of penalty is an ignoble place, just as the place of glory is noble; and again, to fault, insofar as it is such, a lower place is owed; but the place of purgatory is penal, and the place of purgatory is also owed by reason of fault: therefore it ought to be ignoble. But the higher a place, the nobler, and the lower, the less noble: therefore etc.

But that it is in the middle seems to be the case.

4. Hugh of Saint Victor[^4]: «It is probable that they are punished in those places in which they committed the fault»; but they committed the fault here in the middle: therefore etc.

5. Likewise, this very thing seems to be the case by example: in the fourth book of the Dialogues[^5] Gregory relates concerning Paschasius that Germanus the bishop, a holy man, found him in certain baths, to which the bishop himself had gone by the counsel of physicians; and Paschasius, who had died long before, was being punished there and was afterward freed by his aid, a sign having been given to that bishop if he should not be found there after the thirtieth day.

6. Likewise, this too seems to be the case by reason: since the purgatorial state is a middle state between the state of glory and the state of eternal damnation: therefore it ought to be in the middle between the two: therefore neither above nor below, but in the middle around us.

### Conclusion.

> The place of purgatory, probably according to the common law, is below; it is also in the middle according to divine dispensation.

**I respond:** It must be said that this has not been determined by the Saints, nor can reasons very effective on this matter easily be brought forward, for the reason that it is permitted here to hold various views; and according to the three parts of the proposed problem various men have been found to hold various things, relying on the reasons already touched upon. For some have said that the place is above, some that it is below under the earth, some that it is there where they sinned. — But if we should say that it is altogether above, reason and authority and revelation will be against it, since frequently more souls have been found suffering around us. If we should say that it is altogether below, the same inconvenience follows. If we should say that it is where they sinned, that seems altogether incredible, or improbable, that all the souls who sinned at Paris should be punished at Paris.

What then is to be said? It can rightly be said that the place of purgatory may be determined in two ways: either according to the common law, or according to divine dispensation. If according to the common law, then just as limbo is to be believed to have been below, not above[^6], so the place of purgatory. And such a place befits the punishment, and such a place also befits the one making satisfaction or the one who is afflicted by the merited foulness of fault. But this place is believed by some to be a part of hell, on account of that saying of Gregory, that under the same fire the elect is purged and the damned is burned, in the fourth book of the Dialogues[^7]. — But if we speak according to the special dispensation, then to diverse souls diverse places have been granted, either for the sake of their swifter liberation, that they may reveal their need to others, as the example of Paschasius teaches; or for the sake of our instruction, that we may sometimes consider that a great penalty is inflicted on sinners after this life; or for the sake of some Saint's impetration, as one reads that Saint Patrick obtained for a certain man that he should be punished in a certain place on earth; from which it arose, by way of fable, that purgatory was there[^8]; and so there are diverse places.
<!-- page 527 -->
It must therefore be granted that there will be a place of purgatory, such that souls are believed to undergo their penalty most of all in those places in which they committed the fault.

[It must therefore be granted that the place of purgatory] is below according to the common law; it is also in the middle according to dispensation; above, in the sphere of fire, it is in none of these ways, but whoever thinks of it as moving thither seems to follow a fantastic fiction.

1. To that, then, which is objected, that it is above, because we have been rescued from the power of darkness; it must be said that souls existing below can also be rescued, because Satan does not reign except over worldly things by association, not by local inhabitation.

2. To that which is objected, that the body follows the nature of the predominant; it must be said that the motion of the soul upward or downward is not according to its own desire, but according to the divine judgment, which is the supreme mover; and because that judgment decreed to afflict it for a time, and this befits the lower place, namely punishment and affliction: therefore that is clear, that it does not follow the nature of the predominant except[^9b] according to the rule of the supreme mover.

3. To that which is objected, that it is a way; it must be said that it is a way that delays, and by the very fact that it delays, it in some manner makes oblique; and because it in some manner makes oblique, therefore it is not necessary that it be exactly in the middle; and then it would be a way straight and swift, whereas now it is slower. And so that is clear.

But the reasons for the other two members, although they are not very effective, nevertheless, because they conclude what is true, must be granted.

To that which is objected last, that it is a middle state, therefore it ought to be in the middle; it must be said that it savors more of the nature of one extreme, for the reason that one is punished there not for what one has of justice, but for what one has of fault. Hence, since there is only a twofold merit, namely good and evil, according to the common law there ought to be only a twofold place corresponding to the retribution of each: one noble, which is the highest, the other ignoble, which is the lowest; and on account of this, as Gregory says, it is called hell (*infernus*), as though "lower" (*inferius*), or beneath us or under us.

la: Col. 1, 13. — Inferius respicitur Eph. 2, 2, ubi Apostolus diabolum nominat «principem potestatis aëris huius».

en: Col. 1:13. — Below, reference is made to Eph. 2:2, where the Apostle names the devil «the prince of the power of this air».

la: Vide tom. II. pag. 321, nota 4.

en: See vol. II, p. 321, note 4.

la: Etiam S. Thom. (hic d. 21. q. 1. a. 1. quaestiunc. 2.) allegat Gregorium; e codd. nostris codd. IK recte August. in de Civ. Dei (lib. I. c. 8. n. 2.); sed quia infra in corp. omnes codd. et edd. exhibent Gregorium, nihil mutavimus. — Pro *irruens* cod. bb *urens*, edd. *puniens*.

en: St. Thomas too (here d. 21, q. 1, a. 1, little-question 2) cites Gregory; among our codices, codd. IK rightly [read] Augustine in *On the City of God* (bk. I, c. 8, n. 2); but because below in the body all codices and editions exhibit Gregory, we have changed nothing. — For *irruens* [breaking in] cod. bb [reads] *urens* [burning], the editions *puniens* [punishing].

la: In Symbolo Apostolorum. — Seq. locus est Col. 2, 13: *Et exspolians principatus et potestates.* Cfr. III. Sent. d. 22. q. 4.

en: In the Apostles' Creed. — The following passage is Col. 2:13 [recte 2:15]: *And despoiling the principalities and powers.* Cf. III Sent., d. 22, q. 4.

la: Lib. II. de Sacram. p. XVI. c. 4: *Et fortassis probabile* etc.

en: *On the Sacraments*, bk. II, p. XVI, c. 4: *And perhaps it is probable* etc.

la: Cap. 40. — Codd. et edd. pro *Germanus* falso *Cyprianus.*

en: Chapter 40. — Codices and editions, for *Germanus*, [read] falsely *Cyprianus.*

la: Vide infra d. 45. a. 1. q. 1. seq. — Vat. pro *sicut* posito *sic*, omittit *non superius*, substituens subinde *ut sit* pro *sic*. Inferius pro *culpabilis* cod. Y *culpae.*

en: See below, d. 45, a. 1, q. 1 and following. — The Vatican edition, for *sicut* [as] putting *sic* [thus], omits *non superius* [not above], substituting thereupon *ut sit* [that it be] for *sic*. Below, for *culpabilis* [culpable] cod. Y [reads] *culpae* [of fault].

la: Cfr. supra nota 2.

en: Cf. note 2 above.

la: Videtur respici Henrici Saltariens. (1130) tr. de Purgat. S. Patritii, in quo agitur de quodam loco in Ilibernia (Reglis) S. Patritii.

en: Reference seems to be made to Henry of Saltrey's (1130) treatise *On the Purgatory of St. Patrick*, in which there is discussion of a certain place in Ireland (Reglis), St. Patrick's [Purgatory].

la: Eaedem sic. Idem recurrit paulo inferius.

en: The editions thus. The same recurs a little below.

la: Secundum August. et Bernard.; cfr. tom. III. pag. 639, nota 3. — *Superius* post *et* cum Vat. cum uno alteroque cod. supplet *corpus.*

en: According to Augustine and Bernard; cf. vol. III, p. 639, note 3. — *Above*, after *et* [and], with the Vatican edition together with one or another codex, supply *corpus* [body].

latin_scholion:
The scholion of the Articulus Unicus (§ I–VII) is rendered in full with **Quaestio I** (chunk `bon-sent-IV-d20-p1-a1-q1`); its §VII (*de loco purgatorii*) and the *De 6.* list address the present question. *Scholion Articuli Unici (§ I–VII) cum* **Quaestione I** *plene redditur; § VII (de loco purgatorii) hanc quaestionem respicit.*

---

english_scholion:
The scholion of the Articulus Unicus (§ I–VII) is rendered in full with **Question I** (chunk `bon-sent-IV-d20-p1-a1-q1`); its §VII (*on the place of purgatory*) and the *De 6.* list address the present question.

---

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** Latin re-set column-by-column from the PDF column bands (`/tmp/colcrop/vol4-p{525,526,527}-{L,R}-{0,1,2}.png`), with the IA djvu OCR (raw lines 58131–58366) as the base for clean running prose and footnote-marker spacing. Per the Vol II/IV override, the PDF is authoritative in the cascade-shattered Respondeo/Solutio/footer regions. Offset pdf = printed + 20 (printed 525–527 = PDF 545–547). Running heads verified: p.525 "DIST. XX. P. I. ART. UNICUS QUAEST. VI"; p.527 "DIST. XX. P. I. DUBIA" (where the dubia begin in the right column, q6's Respondeo replies finishing in the left column).

**Page layout.** QUAESTIO VI opens at the foot of p.525 left col. (after q5's Solutio finishes in the right col.); its title and the first *sed contra* arguments fall on p.525 right col. The body bulk (args 1–6 + CONCLUSIO + Respondeo opening) is on p.526; the Respondeo and its five replies (Ad 1, Ad 2, Ad 3, the joint remark on the other two members, and Ad e. fundam.) finish on p.527 left+right cols., immediately before `DUBIA CIRCA LITTERAM MAGISTRI`. Per-page footer sequences: p.525 footers 1–5 + p.526 footers 1–4 belong to this question (here merged into one 10-entry apparatus, marker `[^10]` = the p.525 footer numbered 10 in the OCR; `[^9b]` = the p.525 footer marked with the apostrophe-glyph "Eaed. sic"). All ten Quaracchi footers for the question are rendered.

**Scholion disposition (TASK FINDING).** `has_scholion: false`. The Articulus Unicus carries a single master scholion block (§ I–VII), printed on p.519 after q1's body and rendered IN FULL in chunk `bon-sent-IV-d20-p1-a1-q1`. Its **§VII (*de loco purgatorii*)** and the *De 6.* list address THIS question. Per the article-scholion convention, q6 renders no scholion of its own and points to q1 with a one-line La+En cross-reference note.

**Cross-chunk hand-offs.** **Picked up from q5 (a1-q5):** q5's Solutio finishes in p.525 right col.; no q5 footer migrates here (q5's footers close on its own pages, and the p.525 left-col. footers 1–5 are q6's, anchored to q6 body args). **Forwarded to p1 dubia (DUBIA CIRCA LITTERAM MAGISTRI, raw 58367+):** the dubia open in the p.527 right column while q6's Respondeo replies still run in the p.527 left column — the two share printed page 527 but split cleanly by column (q6 = left col. + the spill at the head of the right col. through "...sub nobis"; Dub. I begins lower in the right col.). The dubia chunk opens its own footer sequence on p.527; no q6 footer migrates to it.

**[?] flags.** None unresolved. The OCR garble "rium est inferius" at the top of p.527 left col. is the broken continuation of "...quod locus purgato- / rius est inferius..." (the word *purgatorius* split across the p.526/527 column break); reconstructed in brackets, confirmed against p.527-L-0. The CONCLUSIO and Respondeo were read from the PDF bands (cascade-shattered in OCR) and parse cleanly.