title: Dist. 34, Part 1, Art. 2, Q. 1

source_text:
<!-- page 743 -->

### Articulus II. *De donis in comparatione ad se invicem.*

Consequenter quaeritur de donis secundum comparationem, quam habent ad se invicem. Et circa hanc quaeruntur tria. Primo quaeritur de donorum numero et distinctione. Secundo quaeritur de ordine et combinatione. Tertio quaeritur de ipsorum evacuatione sive duratione.

### Quaestio I. *De donorum numero et distinctione.*
#### *Utrum dona Spiritus sancti sint tantummodo septem.*

Circa primum sic proceditur et ostenditur, quod dona sunt tantummodo septem:

1. *Primo* auctoritate Isaiae undecimo[^1]: *Requiescet super eum Spiritus Domini, spiritus sapientiae et intellectus* etc., ubi septem dona enumerantur[^2] et non plura: si ergo omnia dona perfecte fuerunt in Christo[^3]: ergo videtur, quod numerus donorum completus sit in septenario.

2. Item, super illud Iob primo[^4]: *Nati sunt ei septem filii*; Gregorius ibi[^5]: «Septem filii Iob, spiritualiter intelligendo, sunt septem dona Spiritus sancti».

<!-- page 744 -->

3. Item, super illud Isaiae quarto[^6]: *Apprehendent septem mulieres virum unum*; dicit Glossa, quod per septem mulieres intelliguntur septem dona Spiritus sancti.

4. Item, per rationem virtutum: quia dona sunt ad expeditionem virtutum: ergo cum virtutes sint tantummodo septem[^7], videtur, quod dona septenarium numerum non excedant.

**Sed contra:**

1. Videtur, quod tantum deberent[^8] esse *quinque*: quia dona respondent virtutibus: ergo cum duae sint tantummodo virtutes ex parte cognitivae, videlicet fides et prudentia; ergo tantum duo deberent esse dona ex parte intellectivae eis correspondentia, videlicet scientia et intellectus: superfluunt ergo duo dona alia, videlicet consilium et sapientia: ergo videtur, quod tantum sint *quinque*.

2. Item, videtur, quod deberent esse tantum *quatuor*: quia dona sunt contra sequelas vel symptomata, quae ex peccato relinquuntur; sed ista sunt quatuor tantum, videlicet ignorantia et infirmitas, malitia et concupiscentia, sicut dicit Beda[^9]: ergo etc.

3. Item, videtur, quod deberent esse tantum *duo*: quia quot modis est reperire bonum, tot modis est reperire malum; sed tantummodo unum est donum, quod expedit contra malum, videlicet donum timoris: ergo videtur, quod unum solum deberet esse aliud[^10], quod habilitaret ad bonum, et sic tantum *duo*. Et sic videtur, quod non sint septem, immo multo pauciora.

4. Item, videtur, quod *duplo plura* debeant esse. Si enim dona sunt ad expeditionem virtutum, et fides habet duo dona ipsam expedientia, videlicet intellectum et scientiam; videtur, quod quaelibet virtus deberet habere duo dona[^11]: cum ergo virtutes sint septem, dona deberent esse *quatuordecim*.

5. Item, videtur, quod saltem deberent esse *duodecim*: quia quatuor dona sunt circa expeditionem rationalis, scilicet scientia et consilium, intellectus et sapientia: cum ergo quaelibet aliarum duarum virium indigeat expediri et sanari, sicut rationalis, cum quaelibet earum sit tantum vel magis infirma: ergo quaelibet earum debet habere quatuor dona. Et si quaelibet earum habet quatuor, cum ipsae sint tres[^12]: ergo dona erunt *duodecim*.

6. Item, videtur, quod saltem deberent esse *decem*: quia, sicut ad perfectionem poenitentiae necessarius est timor, sic etiam necessaria sunt pudor et dolor[^13] et gaudium ad hoc, quod homo poenitere valeat perfecte et expedite: igitur super haec dona videtur quod debeant esse alia tria. Cum ergo praedicta dona sint septem, aliis tribus superadditis, videtur, quod deberent esse *decem*.

Quaeritur ergo: quare tot sunt, nec plura nec pauciora?

### CONCLUSIO.

> Dona Spiritus sancti sunt tantum septem.

**Respondeo:** Ad praedictorum intelligentiam est notandum, quod numerus, distinctio et sufficientia donorum quadrupliciter accipitur[^14] secundum ipsorum donorum comparationem quadruplicem. Habent enim dona primo comparari vel considerari respectu habituum annexorum; secundo respectu suorum oppositorum; tertio respectu finium proximorum; quarto respectu actuum et obiectorum.

Per comparationem igitur ad habitus annexos sufficientia donorum dupliciter accipitur: uno modo, ut unumquodque donum alicui virtuti respondeat. Ut incipiamus a superiori, sapientia respondet caritati; intellectus fidei; consilium vero, propter hoc quod ordinat ad ea quae supererogationis sunt, in quibus spes aeternorum concipitur, respondet ipsi spei; fortitudo fortitudini; scientia prudentiae; pietas iustitiae; timor modestiae sive temperantiae. — Aliter possunt sumi, secundum quod ordinantur ad expeditionem virtutum theologicarum: quia enim fides credit temporalia et aeterna quantum ad articulos Divinitatis et humanitatis[^15], duo habet expedientia, intellectum scilicet circa aeterna, et scientiam circa temporalia. Similiter caritas circa duo habet affici, videlicet circa Deum et circa proximum, et secundum hoc habet duo expedientia, videlicet sapientiam respectu Dei, et pietatem respectu proximi. Spes etiam potest dupliciter a statu suo everti, vel per extollentiam in prosperis, vel per depressionem in adversis; et ideo habet duo dona expedientia, unum contra prospera, scilicet donum timoris, alterum contra adversa, scilicet donum fortitudinis. Et ut omnia[^16] expedite et sine errore currant, do-

<!-- page 745 -->

num consilii his sex donis superadditur, ut simul sit in omnibus praedictis expeditio cum maturitate. Et haec est prima via accipiendi donorum sufficientiam. — Huic tamen viae satis potest inferri calumnia, quia solummodo videtur ibi esse quaedam adaptationis congruentia.

Secunda autem via accipiendi sufficientiam donorum est respectu suorum oppositorum. Et hoc potest similiter dupliciter fieri, videlicet respectu peccatorum capitalium, vel respectu symptomatum consequentium. Respectu peccatorum sic: ut timor sit contra superbiam; pietas contra invidiam; scientia contra iram, quae mentem perturbat; fortitudo contra accidiam, quae mentem deiicit; consilium contra avaritiam, quae contra divinum consilium vult omnia retinere; intellectus contra gulam et ebrietatem, quae rationem suffocant; sed sapientia contra luxuriam, cui non sapiunt nisi carnalia. — Alius modus sumendi est contra symptomata, quem assignat Gregorius in Moralibus[^17] super illud: *Ventus vehemens* etc.: «Spiritus, qui ante omnia mentibus ornatum septem virtutibus ornat, eandem contra singula tentamenta virtutibus roborat». Et post subdit: «Contra stultitiam sapientia, contra hebetudinem intellectus, contra praecipitationem consilium, contra pusillanimitatem fortitudo, contra ignorantiam scientia, contra duritiam pietas, contra superbiam timor». Et nota, quod superbia accipitur ibi non pro vitio capitali, sed pro pronitate. — Hic autem modus sumendi, etsi satis idoneus sit, tamen calumniabilis est uterque. Primus calumniabilis est, quia dona non sunt directe contra peccata. Uterque etiam est calumniabilis, quia quasi a posteriori sumitur; et est ibi quaedam circulatio[^18], quia ita bene sumitur sufficientia et numerus peccatorum et illarum poenalitatum per comparationem ad dona, sicut e contrario.

Tertia via sumendi sufficientiam donorum est per comparationem ad fines proximos; et hoc potest esse dupliciter. Dona enim, sicut dictum est[^19], sunt uno modo ordinata ad patiendum conformiter Christo. Christus autem habuit haec septem dona, secundum quae esset perfecte dispositus ad patiendum. Quod enim primo movit Christum ad patiendum fuit omnimoda obedientia et subiectio respectu Patris, et quantum ad hoc fuit donum timoris. Secundum vero, quod movebat, erat compassio humani generis, et quantum ad hoc erat donum pietatis. His autem duobus praesuppositis, non restabat nisi aggressio passionis, et quantum ad hanc attenditur[^20] donum fortitudinis. Post hoc autem erat delectatio in impletione voluntatis paternae et nostra liberatione, et quantum ad hanc est donum sapientiae. Ad haec autem dirigenda necessaria erant alia dona tanquam directiva, videlicet scientia, quae est directiva pietatis, et consilium, quod est directivum fortitudinis, et intellectus, qui est praeambulum respectu sapientiae.

Alius modus sumendi iuxta hanc viam est, quia dona sunt ad expediendum et expedite perveniendum in ultimum finem, et secundum hoc distinguuntur: quia aut expediunt contra malum, aut ad bonum. Si contra malum; sic est timor. Si ad bonum; aut ad bonum quod est finis, aut ad bonum, quod est ad finem. Si ad bonum, quod est finis; aut per modum videntis, aut per modum gustantis. Primo modo est intellectus; secundo modo sapientia. Si ad bonum, quod est ad finem; hoc potest esse dupliciter: aut quia illud bonum est supererogationis, aut necessitatis. Si supererogationis, hoc dupliciter: quia donum ad illud bonum aut se habet per modum dirigentis, et sic est consilium; aut per modum exsequentis sive aggredientis, et sic est fortitudo. Si vero sit bonum necessitatis, similiter est dupliciter: quia aut donum se habet respectu illius boni per modum regulantis, et sic est scientia; aut per modum exsequentis, et sic est pietas, cuius est exhibere opera misericordiae, sicut dicit Gregorius in Moralibus[^21].

<!-- page 746 -->

Quarta via sumendi sufficientiam donorum est per comparationem ad actus proprios. Actus autem, circa quos consistunt ipsa dona, dupliciter possunt distingui: aut secundum distinctionem virium animae, aut secundum distinctionem duplicis vitae, activae videlicet et contemplativae. Secundum[^22] distinctionem virium animae sic. Cum sit in nobis triplex vis, videlicet irascibilis, concupiscibilis et rationalis; concupiscibilis dupliciter impeditur in opere suo: aut quia non compatitur malo, aut quia non gustat bonum; et sic duplex est donum ordinatum ad expediendum eius actum: unum, per quod expeditur ad gustandum bonum, et hoc est sapientia; aliud, per quod expeditur ad compatiendum malo, et hoc est pietas. Similiter irascibilis dupliciter impeditur in actu suo recto: aut quia evanescit in prosperitate et effertur in altum, aut quia in adversitate deficit et deiicitur in imum. Timor igitur datur ei, ut expedite currat in prosperis: fortitudo, ut expedite currat in adversis. Rationalis autem tripliciter habet impediri: aut propter ignorantiam in cognoscendis, aut propter praecipitationem in deliberandis, aut propter hebetudinem in investigandis; et ideo datur ei triplex donum, videlicet donum scientiae, ut expediatur in cognoscendo; et donum consilii, ut expediatur in deliberando; et donum intellectus, ut expediatur in sublimia perscrutando.

Aliter sumitur distinctio donorum secundum distinctionem duplicis vitae, videlicet activae et contemplativae. Si quantum ad vitam contemplativam; sic est triplex actus correspondens actui hierarchico, videlicet illuminare, purgare et perficere[^23], et secundum hoc triplex donum: unum, quod disponit ad purgationem, et hoc est timor; aliud, quod attenditur secundum actum illuminandi, et hoc est intellectus; tertium, quod attenditur secundum actum perficiendi, et hoc est sapientia. — Secundum autem vitam activam distinguuntur actus: quia quidam sunt necessitatis, et quidam supererogationis; et respectu utrorumque est donum exsequens et dirigens[^24], et sic sunt quatuor dona, quae cum aliis tribus faciunt septem.

Vel aliter: in vita activa oportet alii communicare bona et sustinere mala; et secundum hoc sunt duo dona: pietas ad bona communicanda, et fortitudo ad mala toleranda. Et haec duo habent duo directiva, ut sic quatuor sint dona expedientia ad actus vitae activae, et tria ad actus vitae contemplativae per quandam correspondentiam ad ipsum esse naturae, ut — sicut ex parte corporis reperitur in nobis quaternitas principiorum, et ex parte animae trinitas potentiarum, et sic in septenario intelliguntur omnia quae constituunt hominem in vita naturae[^25] — sic etiam in septenario numero sint dona sancti Spiritus, quae expediunt hominem quantum ad vitam gratiae, ita quod tria sunt ex parte vitae spiritualis et interioris sive contemplativae, correspondentia ad tres potentias animae; quatuor vero respectu vitae activae, correspondentia quadruplici principio constitutivo corporis. — Et in hoc eodem numero propter perfectam integritatem est numerus virtutum et numerus beatitudinum et numerus petitionum in oratione dominica et numerus Sacramentorum. Et contra hoc est numerus peccatorum capitalium et numerus septem symptomatum sive sequelarum, quas ponit Gregorius in Moralibus[^26]. Et ad haec omnia praefiguranda praecessit in primordio conditionis totius esse numerus septem dierum propter septiformem illuminationem gratiae, quae est in nobis ex illius lucis supernae irradiatione.

Sic igitur patet, quod quadruplex est via sumendi donorum sufficientiam, et octo modi, inter quos nescio si aliquis est, qui satisfacit[^27] curioso perscrutatori. Hoc tamen constat, secundum quod auctoritates dicunt, quod dona Spiritus sancti sunt tantum septem, nec plura nec pauciora.

**Ad argumenta:**

*Ad 1.* Ad illud ergo quod primo obiicitur in contrarium, quod deberent esse tantum quinque, quia duo solum deberent respicere cognitionem; dicendum, quod sicut iam patet, quod alius et alius est modus sumendi sufficientiam virtutum et sufficientiam donorum. Quia enim dona ad expediendum sunt; et expeditio maxime fit per ea quae dirigunt et viam[^28] ostendunt: ideo plura dona respiciunt cognitionem quam affectionem; sed econtra est de virtutibus, quia sunt ad rectificandum; et rectitudo maxime consistit circa voluntatem et affectionem: et ideo non est simile hinc et inde.

*Ad 2.* Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod deberent esse quatuor contra quatuor, quae sunt nobis inflicta pro peccato; dicendum, quod etsi tantum sint quatuor principalia, multa tamen sunt symptomata et sequelae ex peccatis derelicta in potentiis animae, ad illa quatuor consequentia; quia ratio non solum infirmatur per ignorantiam, sed etiam per hebetudinem[^29] et praecipitationem.

*Ad 3.* Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod tantum deberent esse duo, quia unum est solum, quod revocat a malo; dicendum, quod non est simile: quia unus est modus fugiendi malum, sed tamen multi sunt modi prosequendi[^30] bonum.

*Ad 4.* Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod deberent esse quatuordecim, cum duo sint expeditiva fidei; dicendum, quod propria ratio sumendi sufficientiam donorum non est penes expeditionem virtutum, sed magis penes expeditionem ipsarum potentiarum in suis actibus. — Verumtamen, si velimus sustinere, quod dona distinguantur penes expeditionem virtutum; tunc respondendum est per interemptionem[^31], quia non sunt duo expedientia fidem, sed tantum unum, ut unicuique virtuti respondeat suum donum secundum modum in praecedentibus assignatum.

*Ad 5.* Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod deberent esse duodecim, quia quaelibet vis animae deberet habere quatuor; respondendum est, quod non est simile:

<!-- page 747 -->

quia, cum rationalis regat se et alias[^32], plura sibi occurrunt impedimenta; et ideo videtur, quod plura habeat dona expedientia.

*Ad 6.* Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod deberent esse decem propter tres alias affectiones, videlicet gaudium, dolorem et pudorem; dicendum, quod non est simile de illis affectionibus[^33] et timore. Nam duae illarum, videlicet dolor et pudor, propter suam imperfectionem non possunt rationem doni habere, sed magis respiciunt Sacramentum poenitentiae; gaudium vero, quia dicit statum et quietem, magis debet inter fructus[^34] quam inter dona Spiritus computari.

english:
<!-- page 743 -->

### Article II. *On the gifts in comparison to one another.*

Consequently it is asked concerning the gifts according to the comparison which they have to one another. And concerning this three things are asked. First it is asked concerning the number and distinction of the gifts. Secondly it is asked concerning their order and combination. Thirdly it is asked concerning their evacuation or duration.

### Question I. *On the number and distinction of the gifts.*
#### *Whether the gifts of the Holy Spirit are only seven.*

Concerning the first point one proceeds thus, and it is shown that the gifts are only seven:

1. *First*, by the authority of Isaiah, chapter eleven[^1]: *The Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and of understanding* etc., where seven gifts are enumerated[^2] and no more: if therefore all the gifts were perfectly in Christ[^3]: therefore it seems that the number of the gifts is complete in the sevenfold.

2. Likewise, on that text of Job, chapter one[^4]: *There were born to him seven sons*; Gregory there[^5]: «The seven sons of Job, understood spiritually, are the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit».

<!-- page 744 -->

3. Likewise, on that text of Isaiah, chapter four[^6]: *Seven women shall take hold of one man*; the Gloss says that by the seven women are understood the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit.

4. Likewise, by reason of the virtues: for the gifts are for the making-apt of the virtues: therefore since the virtues are only seven[^7], it seems that the gifts do not exceed the sevenfold number.

**On the contrary:**

1. It seems that there should[^8] be only *five*: for the gifts correspond to the virtues: therefore since there are only two virtues on the side of the cognitive, namely faith and prudence; therefore there should be only two gifts on the side of the intellective corresponding to them, namely knowledge and understanding: therefore the other two gifts are superfluous, namely counsel and wisdom: therefore it seems that there are only *five*.

2. Likewise, it seems that there should be only *four*: for the gifts are against the sequels or symptoms which are left from sin; but these are only four, namely ignorance and infirmity, malice and concupiscence, as Bede says[^9]: therefore etc.

3. Likewise, it seems that there should be only *two*: for in as many ways as good is to be found, in so many ways is evil to be found; but there is only one gift which makes apt against evil, namely the gift of fear: therefore it seems that there should be only one other[^10], which would render apt for good, and thus only *two*. And thus it seems that they are not seven, but rather far fewer.

4. Likewise, it seems that there should be *twice as many*. For if the gifts are for the making-apt of the virtues, and faith has two gifts making it apt, namely understanding and knowledge; it seems that every virtue should have two gifts[^11]: therefore since the virtues are seven, the gifts should be *fourteen*.

5. Likewise, it seems that there should at least be *twelve*: for four gifts are concerned with the making-apt of the rational, namely knowledge and counsel, understanding and wisdom: therefore since each of the other two powers needs to be made apt and healed, just as the rational, since each of them is equally or more infirm: therefore each of them ought to have four gifts. And if each of them has four, since they are three[^12]: therefore the gifts will be *twelve*.

6. Likewise, it seems that there should at least be *ten*: for, just as fear is necessary for the perfection of penance, so also are shame and grief[^13] and joy necessary for this, that a man may be able to do penance perfectly and readily: therefore over and above these gifts it seems that there should be three others. Since therefore the aforesaid gifts are seven, with three others superadded, it seems that there should be *ten*.

It is asked therefore: why are there so many, neither more nor fewer?

### Conclusion

> The gifts of the Holy Spirit are only seven.

**I respond:** For the understanding of the aforesaid it must be noted that the number, distinction, and sufficiency of the gifts is taken in a fourfold way[^14] according to the fourfold comparison of the gifts themselves. For the gifts can be compared or considered, first, with respect to the habits annexed; secondly, with respect to their opposites; thirdly, with respect to their proximate ends; fourthly, with respect to their acts and objects.

Through the comparison, then, to the annexed habits the sufficiency of the gifts is taken in a twofold way: in one way, so that each single gift corresponds to some virtue. That we may begin from the highest, wisdom corresponds to charity; understanding to faith; but counsel, on account of this, that it orders to those things which are of supererogation, in which the hope of eternal things is conceived, corresponds to hope itself; fortitude to fortitude; knowledge to prudence; piety to justice; fear to modesty or temperance. — In another way they can be taken according as they are ordered to the making-apt of the theological virtues: for since faith believes things temporal and eternal as regards the articles of the Divinity and the humanity[^15], it has two making it apt, namely understanding concerning eternal things, and knowledge concerning temporal things. Likewise charity has to be affected concerning two things, namely concerning God and concerning neighbor, and according to this it has two making it apt, namely wisdom with respect to God, and piety with respect to neighbor. Hope too can be overturned from its state in two ways, either through being lifted up in prosperity, or through being cast down in adversity; and therefore it has two gifts making it apt, one against prosperity, namely the gift of fear, the other against adversity, namely the gift of fortitude. And that all things[^16] may run readily and without error, the

<!-- page 745 -->

gift of counsel is superadded to these six gifts, that there may at once be in all the aforesaid a making-apt with maturity. And this is the first path of taking the sufficiency of the gifts. — Yet to this path a fault can readily be charged, because there seems to be there only a certain congruity of adaptation.

But the second path of taking the sufficiency of the gifts is with respect to their opposites. And this can likewise be done in two ways, namely with respect to the capital sins, or with respect to the consequent symptoms. With respect to the sins thus: that fear is against pride; piety against envy; knowledge against anger, which disturbs the mind; fortitude against sloth, which casts down the mind; counsel against avarice, which against the divine counsel wishes to retain all things; understanding against gluttony and drunkenness, which suffocate the reason; but wisdom against lust, to which nothing savors but carnal things. — Another manner of taking is against the symptoms, which Gregory assigns in the *Morals*[^17] on that text: *A vehement wind* etc.: «The Spirit, who first of all adorns minds with the seven virtues, strengthens that same mind with the virtues against the several temptations». And afterward he adds: «Against folly, wisdom; against dullness, understanding; against rashness, counsel; against pusillanimity, fortitude; against ignorance, knowledge; against hardness, piety; against pride, fear». And note that pride is taken there not for a capital vice, but for proneness. — But this manner of taking, although it is sufficiently fitting, is yet open to charge in both forms. The first is open to charge, because the gifts are not directly against sins. Each is also open to charge, because it is taken as it were from what is posterior; and there is there a certain circularity[^18], because the sufficiency and number of the sins and of those penalties is just as well taken through the comparison to the gifts, as conversely.

The third path of taking the sufficiency of the gifts is through the comparison to the proximate ends; and this can be in two ways. For the gifts, as has been said[^19], are in one way ordered to suffering in conformity with Christ. Now Christ had these seven gifts, according to which he was perfectly disposed to suffering. For what first moved Christ to suffering was complete obedience and subjection with respect to the Father, and as to this there was the gift of fear. But the second thing which moved him was compassion for the human race, and as to this there was the gift of piety. But these two being presupposed, there remained nothing but the undertaking of the passion, and as to this is attended to[^20] the gift of fortitude. But after this there was delight in the fulfilling of the Father's will and in our liberation, and as to this there is the gift of wisdom. But for the directing of these things there were necessary other gifts as directive, namely knowledge, which is directive of piety, and counsel, which is directive of fortitude, and understanding, which is the preamble with respect to wisdom.

Another manner of taking along this path is, that the gifts are for making apt and for readily attaining unto the last end, and according to this they are distinguished: for either they make apt against evil, or unto good. If against evil; thus is fear. If unto good; either unto the good which is the end, or unto the good which is for the end. If unto the good which is the end; either by way of one seeing, or by way of one tasting. In the first way is understanding; in the second way wisdom. If unto the good which is for the end; this can be in two ways: either because that good is of supererogation, or of necessity. If of supererogation, this in two ways: for the gift toward that good either stands by way of one directing, and thus is counsel; or by way of one executing or undertaking, and thus is fortitude. But if it be a good of necessity, likewise it is in two ways: for either the gift stands with respect to that good by way of one regulating, and thus is knowledge; or by way of one executing, and thus is piety, whose office is to show forth the works of mercy, as Gregory says in the *Morals*[^21].

<!-- page 746 -->

The fourth path of taking the sufficiency of the gifts is through the comparison to proper acts. Now the acts about which the gifts themselves are concerned can be distinguished in two ways: either according to the distinction of the powers of the soul, or according to the distinction of the twofold life, namely the active and the contemplative. According to[^22] the distinction of the powers of the soul thus. Since there is in us a threefold power, namely the irascible, the concupiscible, and the rational; the concupiscible is impeded in its operation in two ways: either because it does not suffer with another in evil, or because it does not taste good; and thus there is a twofold gift ordered to making apt its act: one, through which it is made apt to taste good, and this is wisdom; another, through which it is made apt to suffer with another in evil, and this is piety. Likewise the irascible is impeded in its right act in two ways: either because it vanishes away in prosperity and is borne up on high, or because in adversity it fails and is cast down to the depths. Fear therefore is given to it, that it may readily run in prosperity: fortitude, that it may readily run in adversity. But the rational is impeded in three ways: either on account of ignorance in things to be known, or on account of rashness in things to be deliberated, or on account of dullness in things to be investigated; and therefore a threefold gift is given to it, namely the gift of knowledge, that it may be made apt in knowing; and the gift of counsel, that it may be made apt in deliberating; and the gift of understanding, that it may be made apt in scrutinizing lofty things.

In another way the distinction of the gifts is taken according to the distinction of the twofold life, namely the active and the contemplative. If as to the contemplative life; thus there is a threefold act corresponding to the hierarchical act, namely to illuminate, to purge, and to perfect[^23], and according to this a threefold gift: one, which disposes to purgation, and this is fear; another, which is attended to according to the act of illuminating, and this is understanding; the third, which is attended to according to the act of perfecting, and this is wisdom. — But according to the active life the acts are distinguished: for some are of necessity, and some of supererogation; and with respect to each there is a gift executing and directing[^24], and thus there are four gifts, which with the other three make seven.

Or otherwise: in the active life it behooves one to share goods with another and to bear evils; and according to this there are two gifts: piety for sharing goods, and fortitude for tolerating evils. And these two have two directive ones, so that thus there are four gifts making apt for the acts of the active life, and three for the acts of the contemplative life, through a certain correspondence to the very being of nature, so that — just as on the side of the body there is found in us a quaternity of principles, and on the side of the soul a trinity of powers, and thus in the sevenfold are understood all the things which constitute man in the life of nature[^25] — so also in the sevenfold number are the gifts of the Holy Spirit, which make man apt as regards the life of grace, so that three are on the side of the spiritual and interior or contemplative life, corresponding to the three powers of the soul; but four with respect to the active life, corresponding to the fourfold constitutive principle of the body. — And in this same number, on account of perfect integrity, is the number of the virtues and the number of the beatitudes and the number of the petitions in the Lord's Prayer and the number of the Sacraments. And against this is the number of the capital sins and the number of the seven symptoms or sequels which Gregory sets down in the *Morals*[^26]. And to prefigure all these things there preceded, in the very beginning of the founding of the whole of being, the number of seven days, on account of the sevenfold illumination of grace, which is in us from the irradiation of that supernal light.

Thus therefore it is plain that the path of taking the sufficiency of the gifts is fourfold, and there are eight modes, among which I know not whether there is any which satisfies[^27] the curious investigator. This, however, is established, according to what the authorities say, that the gifts of the Holy Spirit are only seven, neither more nor fewer.

**To the arguments:**

*To 1.* As to what is first objected to the contrary, that there should be only five, because only two should regard cognition; it must be said that, as is now plain, the manner of taking the sufficiency of the virtues and the sufficiency of the gifts is one and another. For since the gifts are for making apt; and the making-apt comes about chiefly through those things which direct and show the way[^28]: therefore more gifts regard cognition than affection; but conversely it is with the virtues, because they are for setting right; and rectitude consists chiefly about will and affection: and therefore it is not alike on the one side and the other.

*To 2.* As to what is objected, that there should be four against the four things which are inflicted on us for sin; it must be said that although there are only four principal ones, yet there are many symptoms and sequels left from sins in the powers of the soul, consequent upon those four; for reason is not only made infirm through ignorance, but also through dullness[^29] and rashness.

*To 3.* As to what is objected, that there should be only two, because there is only one which calls back from evil; it must be said that it is not alike: for there is one manner of fleeing evil, but yet there are many manners of pursuing[^30] good.

*To 4.* As to what is objected, that there should be fourteen, since two are making faith apt; it must be said that the proper account of taking the sufficiency of the gifts is not according to the making-apt of the virtues, but rather according to the making-apt of the powers themselves in their acts. — Nevertheless, if we wish to maintain that the gifts are distinguished according to the making-apt of the virtues; then the answer must be given by way of denial[^31], because there are not two making faith apt, but only one, so that to each single virtue there corresponds its own gift according to the manner assigned in what precedes.

*To 5.* As to what is objected, that there should be twelve, because each power of the soul should have four; the answer must be given that it is not alike:

<!-- page 747 -->

for, since the rational governs itself and the others[^32], more impediments occur to it; and therefore it seems that it has more gifts making it apt.

*To 6.* As to what is objected, that there should be ten on account of three other affections, namely joy, grief, and shame; it must be said that it is not alike concerning those affections[^33] and fear. For two of them, namely grief and shame, on account of their imperfection cannot have the account of a gift, but rather regard the Sacrament of penance; but joy, because it says a state and rest, ought rather to be counted among the fruits[^34] than among the gifts of the Spirit.

la: Hic in corp. et in quaest. praeced.

en: Here in the body and in the preceding question.

la: Cfr. supra pag. 737, nota 3. — Paulo superius pro *ad habitum* edd. cum aliquot codd. *per habitum*. — Vide scholion ad 1. huius articuli quaest.

en: Cfr. above pag. 737, nota 3. — A little above, for *ad habitum* the editions with several codices read *per habitum*. — See the scholion to question 1 of this article.

la: Edd. cum paucis codd. *hoc*.

en: The editions with a few codices read *hoc*.

la: Vers. 2.

en: Verse 2 (Job 1:2).

la: Vers. 2. — Verba Gregorii fusiora invenis in eius l. Moral. c. 27. n. 38.

en: Verse 2. — The fuller words of Gregory you will find in his *Morals* I, c. 27, n. 38.

la: Vers. 1. — Glossa hic allegata ordinaria est apud Strabum et Lyranum; sumta est ex Hieronymi Comment. in hunc loc.

en: Verse 1. — The Gloss here adduced is the Ordinary [Gloss] in Strabo and Lyra; it is taken from Jerome's Commentary on this passage.

la: Tres nimirum theologicae et quatuor cardinales. — Post *per rationem virtutum* codd. U Z supplent *videtur*.

en: Namely the three theological and the four cardinal. — After *per rationem virtutum* codd. U Z supply *videtur*.

la: Ita codd. H I L T, cod. Z *debeant*, in aliis *debent*.

en: So codd. H I L T; cod. Z reads *debeant*, in others *debent*.

la: Cfr. tom. II. pag. 721, nota 6. — Quoad proposit. praecedentem vide supra a. 1. q. 1. in corp.

en: Cfr. tom. II, pag. 721, nota 6. — As to the preceding proposition see above a. 1, q. 1, in the body.

la: In edd. et nonnullis codd. desideratur *aliud*. In fine arg. pro *non sint* permulti codd. *non sunt*.

en: In the editions and some codices *aliud* is wanting. At the end of the argument, for *non sint* very many codices read *non sunt*.

la: Codd. W aa bb omittunt *dona*, pro quo plurimi codd. *alia*.

en: Codd. W aa bb omit *dona*, for which very many codices read *alia*.

la: Scil. rationalis, concupiscibilis et irascibilis.

en: Namely the rational, the concupiscible, and the irascible.

la: S. Bonav., Incend. amoris, c. 2: *Deploratio miseriae... haec tria debet habere, scil. dolorem, pudorem et timorem; dolorem propter damnum sive incommodum, pudorem propter opprobrium sive inhonestum, timorem propter periculum sive reatum* etc. Cfr. Bernard., Serm. in Cantic. serm. 16. n. 1. seqq. — Paulo inferius pro *debeant* cod. K *deberent*.

en: St. Bonaventure, *The Kindling of Love*, c. 2: *The lamenting of misery... ought to have these three, namely grief, shame, and fear; grief on account of loss or harm, shame on account of reproach or what is dishonorable, fear on account of danger or guilt*, etc. Cfr. Bernard, *Sermons on the Canticle*, sermon 16, n. 1 ff. — A little below, for *debeant* cod. K reads *deberent*.

la: Codd. A U *accipiuntur*. Paulo post plurimi codd. omittunt *primo*.

en: Codd. A U read *accipiuntur*. A little after, very many codices omit *primo*.

la: Cfr. supra d. 24. a. 1. q. 2. et d. 23. a. 1. q. 1. — Mox pro *Similiter* edd. *Sic*.

en: Cfr. above d. 24, a. 1, q. 2, and d. 23, a. 1, q. 1. — Shortly, for *Similiter* the editions read *Sic*.

la: Cod. A *magis*. Post pauca pro *expeditio* edd. *expediens*.

en: Cod. A reads *magis*. After a few words, for *expeditio* the editions read *expediens*.

la: Libr. II. c. 49. n. 77. Cfr. supra pag. 700, nota 1. Locus Scripturae est Iob 1, 19. — Paulo superius pro *cui non sapiunt* edd. *quae non sapit*.

en: Book II, c. 49, n. 77. Cfr. above pag. 700, nota 1. The Scripture passage is Job 1:19. — A little above, for *cui non sapiunt* the editions read *quae non sapit*.

la: Cfr. Aristot., I. Prior. c. 5. et I. Poster. c. 13. (c. 11.). — Pro *circulatio* edd. 1, 2 *circumlocutio*, codd. W Y *quaedam adaptatio et circulatio*.

en: Cfr. Aristotle, *Prior Analytics* I, c. 5, and *Posterior Analytics* I, c. 13 (c. 11). — For *circulatio* edd. 1, 2 read *circumlocutio*; codd. W Y *a certain adaptation and circularity*.

la: Art. 1. q. 1. in corp. — Paulo post pro *secundum quae* tuetur edd. *secundum quae erat*.

en: Art. 1, q. 1, in the body. — A little after, for *secundum quae* [it is to be read?] the editions read *secundum quae erat*.

la: Complures codd. et edd. 1, 2 *et quantum ad hanc attenditur* [partim: *partim*] *attenditur* [codd. I, S: *datur*]. Subinde pro *Post hoc* codd. A I K L Z ae *Post haec*.

en: Several codices and edd. 1, 2 read *et quantum ad hanc attenditur* (in part *partim*) [codd. I, S: *datur*]. Thereupon for *Post hoc* codd. A I K L Z ae read *Post haec*.

la: Codd. F V *Si secundum*.

en: Codd. F V read *Si secundum*.

la: Secundum Dionysium; cfr. tom. II. pag. 127, nota 2.

en: According to Dionysius; cfr. tom. II, pag. 127, nota 2.

la: Vide paulo superius, ubi tertia via sumendi describitur, in fine. — Pro *respectu utrorumque* cod. X *respectu utriusque*. Vat., superius post *supererogationis* male additis verbis *et ad primos disponit pietas sive donum pietatis, ad secundos vero disponit fortitudo*, hic glossando subiungit: *Nam respectu primorum exsequens est pietas, dirigens vero est scientia sive donum scientiae. Respectu autem secundorum exsequens est fortitudo, dirigens vero est consilium.* — De donis, quatenus vitae activae et contemplativae adaptantur, cfr. Eadmer., de S. Anselmi similitudinibus (inter opera Anselmi), c. 132.

en: See a little above, where the third path of taking is described, at the end. — For *respectu utrorumque* cod. X reads *respectu utriusque*. The Vatican edition, having above after *supererogationis* wrongly added the words *and to the first piety or the gift of piety disposes, but to the second fortitude disposes*, here adds by way of gloss: *For with respect to the first the executing one is piety, but the directing one is knowledge or the gift of knowledge. But with respect to the second the executing one is fortitude, but the directing one is counsel.* — On the gifts, insofar as they are adapted to the active and contemplative life, cfr. Eadmer, *On the Similitudes of St. Anselm* (among the works of Anselm), c. 132.

la: Cfr. August., II. Quaest. Evangel. q. 6. — Superius pro *ad ipsum esse* cod. A *ad primum esse*; subinde pro *ut sicut* sane multi codd. substituerunt *et sicut*, quorum tamen plures infra *non, ut deberent*, exhibent modo indicativo *sunt dona sancti Spiritus*, sed *nobiscum sint dona sancti Spiritus*.

en: Cfr. Augustine, *Eighty-three Questions on the Gospels* II, q. 6. — Above, for *ad ipsum esse* cod. A reads *ad primum esse*; thereupon for *ut sicut* indeed many codices substitute *et sicut*, of which however several below, *not, as they ought*, present in the indicative mood *the gifts of the Holy Spirit are*, but *with us let the gifts of the Holy Spirit be*.

la: Libr. II. c. 49. n. 77. Vide superius descriptionem comparationis secundae, in fine. — Circa finem corp. pro *satisfacit* codd. A Z *satisfaciat*.

en: Book II, c. 49, n. 77. See above the description of the second comparison, at the end. — Near the end of the body, for *satisfacit* codd. A Z read *satisfaciat*.

la: Augustin., V. Quaest. in Pentateuch. q. 42: *Ideo namque [septenarius] perhibetur perfectus, quia ex his duobus constat: ternario, scil. primo impari toto, et quaternario, primo pari toto.* Cfr. XI. de Civ. Dei, c. 31. Vide etiam S. Bonav., Hexaem. serm. 16. — Plurimi codd. *eam*.

en: Augustine, *Questions on the Pentateuch* V, q. 42: *For therefore [the number seven] is held to be perfect, because it is composed of these two: the ternary, namely the first whole odd number, and the quaternary, the first whole even number.* Cfr. *City of God* XI, c. 31. See also St. Bonaventure, *Hexaemeron*, sermon 16. — Very many codices read *eam*.

la: Plurimi codd. *eam*.

en: Very many codices read *eam*.

la: Edd. *hebetationem*.

en: The editions read *hebetationem* (in place of *hebetudinem*).

la: Cod. M *consequendi*.

en: Cod. M reads *consequendi* (for *prosequendi*).

la: Vide supra pag. 570, nota 6. — Circa initium solut. pro *expeditiva* cod. V *expedientia*.

en: See above pag. 570, nota 6. — Near the beginning of the solution, for *expeditiva* cod. V reads *expedientia*.

la: Cfr. supra pag. 720, nota 1.

en: Cfr. above pag. 720, nota 1.

la: Edd. *affectibus*.

en: The editions read *affectibus* (for *affectionibus*).

la: Gal. 5, 22. 23: *Fructus autem Spiritus est: caritas, gaudium, pax, patientia, benignitas, bonitas, longanimitas, mansuetudo, fides, modestia, continentia, castitas.*

en: Gal. 5:22–23: *But the fruit of the Spirit is: charity, joy, peace, patience, benignity, goodness, longanimity, mildness, faith, modesty, continence, chastity.*

latin_scholion:
**I.** Postquam auctor octo modos sufficientiam huius septenarii numeri demonstrandi enumeravit, in fine addit: «Inter quos nescio si aliquis est, qui satisfacit curioso perscrutatori». Idem in Breviloq. (p. V. c. 3.) docet, ex septiformi causa septenarium numerum convenientem esse, cum anima nostra indigeat septiformiter expediri. «Indiget namque expediri contra vitiorum obliquitates — quantum ad vires naturales — quoad superadditas virtutes — in patiendo — in agendo — in contemplando — et utroque modo»; quorum explanationem videsis ibid. — Numerus septenarius donorum tum Scriptura (Isai. 11, 2.), ut exhibetur in textu Graeco et Latino, tum traditione usuque Ecclesiae consecratus est. «Ceterum non nisi sex dona in Hebraeo recensentur, cum timor Domini bis repetatur; quam repetitionem vitaturi Septuaginta et S. Hieronymus semel reddiderunt spiritus pietatis» (ita Calmet in cit. locum Isai.). Quibus addi potest, vocem Hebraicam amplioris esse significationis, ut exprimat tum reverentiam (pietatem) tum timorem. Hinc tamen plures acatholici auctores sumserunt ansam septenarium donorum numerum impugnandi.

**II.** De eadem quaestione: S. Thom., hic q. 1. a. 2; S. 1. II. q. 68. a. 1. — Petr. a Tar., hic q. 1. a. 2. — Durand., hic q. 2.

---

english_scholion:
**I.** After the author has enumerated eight modes of demonstrating the sufficiency of this sevenfold number, at the end he adds: «Among which I know not whether there is any which satisfies the curious investigator». The same thing he teaches in the *Breviloquium* (p. V. c. 3.), that from a sevenfold cause the sevenfold number is fitting, since our soul needs to be made apt in a sevenfold manner. «For it needs to be made apt against the obliquities of the vices — as regards the natural powers — as to the superadded virtues — in suffering — in acting — in contemplating — and in either mode»; the explanation of which you may see there. — The sevenfold number of the gifts has been consecrated both by Scripture (Isa. 11:2), as it is set forth in the Greek and Latin text, and by the tradition and usage of the Church. «But only six gifts are reckoned in the Hebrew, since the fear of the Lord is twice repeated; which repetition the Septuagint and St. Jerome, wishing to avoid, once rendered as the spirit of piety» (so Calmet on the cited passage of Isaiah). To which it can be added that the Hebrew word is of broader signification, so that it expresses both reverence (piety) and fear. Hence, however, several non-Catholic authors have taken occasion to impugn the sevenfold number of the gifts.

**II.** On the same question: St. Thomas, here q. 1, a. 2; S. 1. II. q. 68, a. 1. — Peter of Tarentaise, here q. 1, a. 2. — Durandus, here q. 2.

---

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** RENAMED from `bon-sent-III-d34-p1-a1-q1-dup2.md` (auto-chunked 2026-06-02) and promoted to Tier 2 (2026-06-12). The `-dup2` siblings were ARTICULUS II's q1/q2/q3 mis-labeled `a1`; this is the correctly-located `a2-q1`. Latin re-set from 450 dpi PDF column bands (`/tmp/colcrop/vol3-p{743–747}-{L,R}-{0,1,2}.png`) per the Vol III two-column PDF-priority inversion: the IA djvu OCR (raw 51610–51891) is cascade-shattered through the entire Respondeo *quadruplex-via* section and across every footer band, so the column-band PDF read is authoritative there; the OCR served only the clean *videtur* / *Sed contra* running args and footnote-marker spacing. Offset pdf = printed + 22; running-head TEXT (`DIST. XXXIV. P. I. ART. II. QUAEST. I/II.`) trusted over OCR'd digits.

**ART. II 3-question listing (CONFIRMED, 3).** ART. II opener (raw 51600, OCR `ARTICULUS U.` / *De donis in comparatione ad se invicem*) lists exactly three: **Primo** — *de donorum numero et distinctione*; **Secundo** — *de ordine et combinatione*; **Tertio** — *de ipsorum evacuatione sive duratione*. Folded into the head of this q1 per the Vol II/III convention (a short article opener + TRACTATIO folds into the article's q1).

**Opener alignment.** PASS 1:1. ART. II Primo (*de donorum numero et distinctione*) = QUAESTIO I header *Utrum dona Spiritus sancti sint tantummodo septem*; body opener *Circa primum sic proceditur et ostenditur, quod dona sunt tantummodo septem*. (Title_la taken from the question title; the Quaestio header gloss-line *De donorum numero et distinctione* is the TRACTATIO's first member.)

**Page span / page-split map.** Body opens p.743 (ART. II opener folded in at head; QUAESTIO I args 1–2 begin lower on p.743 both columns), runs through pp.744–746, closes p.747 with the *Ad 5* tail + *Ad 6* + the article-master SCHOLION §I–II. Bounded below by QUAESTIO II (= sibling a2-q2) whose header `DIST. XXXIV. P. I. ART. II. QUAEST. II.` opens on p.747 (raw 51892). Per-page footer map (NOTAE AD COMMENTARIUM, Quaracchi per-page restart, renumbered continuous here):
- **p.743** R-col nn.6–10 → `[^1]`–`[^5]` (PICKED UP — a1-q3 took p.743 nn.1–5; anchors on the opener / args 1–2).
- **p.744** nn.1–11 → `[^6]`–`[^16]` (L-col nn.1–7, R-col nn.8–11).
- **p.745** nn.1–6 → `[^17]`–`[^22]` (L-col nn.1–2, R-col nn.3–6).
- **p.746** nn.1–9 → `[^23]`–`[^31]` (L-col nn.1–3, R-col nn.4–9).
- **p.747** nn.1–3 → `[^32]`–`[^34]` (CROSS-PAGE SPLIT: the *Ad 5* tail + *Ad 6* are physically printed on p.747, so the page's footer band splits — n.1 `Cfr. supra pag. 720, nota 1.` anchors the *Ad 5* tail "regat se et alias"; n.2 `Edd. affectibus` and n.3 `Gal. 5, 22. 23` anchor *Ad 6*. The REMAINING p.747 footers, nn.4–5 [`Vers. 2. 3.`; `Cod. Z incipere`] + the whole `DIST. … QUAEST. II.` band, serve QUAESTIO II = a2-q2). The SCHOLION carries no apparatus markers.

**Apparatus count = 34.** 34 physical Quaracchi footer notes anchored in a2-q1's body, across five footer-bearing pages (p.743-R: 5 picked-up; p.744: 11; p.745: 6; p.746: 9; p.747: 3 cross-page-split) → 34 rendered `[^1]`–`[^34]` entries. Every rendered `[^N]` has a matching anchor in BOTH the Latin and English bodies (34/34 markers pair clean; verified per-section: Latin body 34 unique, English body 34 unique, apparatus defs 34). Markers `[^1]`–`[^34]` all anchor inside the videtur / Respondeo / replies body; the SCHOLION carries none.

**Scholion disposition.** `has_scholion: true`. This q1 carries the **article-master SCHOLION §I–II** (printed p.747, OCR `SCHOLION.` at raw ~51858; §I in p.747 L-col bridging into R-col top, §II in p.747 R-col), placed body-then-scholion LAST in each language block per the parser rule. **§I** = the sevenfold-number defense (Breviloquium p.V c.3 septiform cause; Scripture + tradition; Calmet's Hebrew note on *timor Domini* repeated → *spiritus pietatis*; the non-Catholic impugners). **§II** = *De eadem quaestione* cross-reference forwarding: S. Thom. (hic q.1 a.2; S. 1.II q.68 a.1), Petr. a Tar. (hic q.1 a.2), Durand. (hic q.2). §II is a short cross-reference forward, NOT a redirect that the siblings will point *back* to — i.e. it does not itself say "pro quaest. seq." So a2-q2 and a2-q3 are expected to carry their **own** scholia; this q1's §II does not absorb theirs. (Contrast the a1-q1 master scholion, whose §III/§IV explicitly forwarded *to* q2/q3.)

**Footer hand-offs.** PICKED UP: the p.743 R-column NOTAE band (nn.6–10 → `[^1]`–`[^5]`) from the prior chunk's page (a1-q3 owned p.743 nn.1–5). FORWARDED to `d34-p1-a2-q2`: the p.747 footer band SPLITS at the q1/q2 seam — a2-q1 keeps p.747 nn.1–3 (`[^32]`–`[^34]`, anchoring its *Ad 5* tail + *Ad 6*, which are printed on p.747); **a2-q2 should pick up p.747 nn.4–5 (`Vers. 2. 3.`; `Cod. Z incipere`) plus the entire `DIST. … P. I. ART. II. QUAEST. II.` NOTAE band as its leading apparatus** (its `Argg. contra ordinem` args open on p.747-L). The SCHOLION §II is a forward cross-reference (S. Thom./Petr. a Tar./Durand. on *this* q.1 a.2), not a "pro quaest. seq." redirect, so it forwards nothing of q2/q3's own scholia.

**`[?]` flags.** NONE — all five PDF pages legible at 450 dpi; the cascade-shattered OCR Respondeo and footer regions were fully recoverable from the column bands.


site: bonaventure

collection: Book III: On the Incarnation of the Word

title: Dist. 34, Part 1, Art. 2, Q. 2

title_alt: Utrum sit aliquis ordo et combinatio in donis Spiritus sancti

title_alt: Whether there is any order and combination in the gifts of the Holy Spirit

author: St. Bonaventure

languages: en la

title: Opera Omnia (Quaracchi critical edition)

publisher: Collegii S. Bonaventurae

source_text:
<!-- page 747 -->

### Quaestio II. *De donorum ordinatione et combinatione.*

Secundo quaeritur de donorum ordine et combinatione, quae duo valde signanter innuit Isaias in praedictorum donorum enumeratione, undecimo capitulo[^1], ubi sic ait de Christo: *Requiescet super eum spiritus Domini: spiritus sapientiae et intellectus, spiritus consilii et fortitudinis, spiritus scientiae et pietatis; et replebit eum spiritus timoris Domini.*

**Argumenta contra ordinem:**

1. *Primo* obiicitur contra ordinem: quia, cum progressus ordinatus debeat esse[^2] ab inferiori ad superius, et donum sapientiae sit maximum, donum vero timoris minimum: cum ergo donum sapientiae ponat primo loco, donum vero timoris postremo; non videtur dona ordinare ordine recto.

2. Item, habitus spectans ad cognitionem praecedit habitum, qui spectat ad affectionem: cum ergo sapientia, a sapore[^3] dicta, spectet ad potentiam affectivam, intellectus vero spectet ad potentiam cognitivam; videtur, quod donum intellectus esset dono sapientiae praeponendum.

3. Item, aut dona ordinantur secundum ordinem dignitatis maioris et minoris, aut secundum ordinem prioritatis et posterioritatis[^4]. Si primo modo: ergo cum maioris perfectionis sit fortitudo quam consilium, et pietas quam scientia, deberent ei praeponi et non postponi. Si secundum ordinem prioritatis et posterioritatis; sic, cum illud quod est ex parte cognitivae praecedat illud quod est ex parte affectivae; videtur, quod intellectus praeponi debeat sapientiae. Quodsi tu dicas, quod intellectus praeponitur sapientiae in ascendendo; tunc similiter quaeritur: quare non praeponitur scientia pietati, et consilium fortitudini in ascendendo, sed magis e contrario?

**Argumenta contra combinationem:**

4. Item, obiicitur contra combinationem: quia habitus virtutum ad invicem non combinantur, immo singillatim distinguuntur: ergo pari ratione nec habitus donorum.

5. Item, si dona combinantur ad invicem; cum combinatio non sit nisi in numero pari, ergo videtur, quod deberent esse plura quam septem.

6. Item, cum quodlibet donum spectans ad affectionem habeat suum directivum[^5], videtur, quod et donum timoris deberet suum directivum habere, cum quo combinaretur; quod si non habet, videtur, quod nec alia deberent habere.

Quaeritur ergo, quae sit ratio combinandi et ordinandi[^6] dona; et quare magis huiusmodi combinatio et ordo assignantur in habitibus donorum quam in differentiis aliorum habituum gratuitorum.

<!-- page 748 -->

### CONCLUSIO.

> Dona Spiritus sancti recte ordinantur et combinantur secundum assignationem Isaiae.

**Respondeo:** Ad praedictorum intelligentiam est notandum, quod in donis est ordo secundum gradum excellentiae et dignitatis; et hoc quantum ad ipsorum donorum usus, secundum quos anima habet collocari in statu perfectiori et digniori, utpote secundum usum doni sapientiae altius elevatur quam secundum usum doni timoris. Ad usum enim illius doni a nemine pervenitur, nisi prius in usu timoris exercitium praemittatur. Cum ergo in eis sit ordo secundum gradus excellentiae et dignitatis; non casu et fortuna, sed valde rationabiliter quaedam dona quibusdam aliis praemittuntur; et modo sic, modo contrarie ordinantur, non propter praeposterationem ordinis, sed propter diversam rationem ordinandi. Sicut enim dicit Augustinus *de sermone Domini in monte*[^7], aliquando enumeratio donorum incipit a primo, utpote a timore, sicut innuit Dominus in Matthaeo; aliquando a summo, utpote a sapientia, sicut scribitur in Isaia.

Uterque modus ordinandi rectus et congruus est, et hoc triplici ratione: tum propter diversum modum accipiendi prius et posterius; tum propter diversitatem modi ascendendi et descendendi a superiori ad inferius; tum propter diversitatem principiorum respectu ipsius habitus. — *Primo* propter diversum modum accipiendi prius et posterius; quoniam sicut vult Philosophus[^8], aliquid est prius generatione et tempore; aliquid est prius complemento et definitione sive dignitate. Primo modo donum timoris est primum quantum ad usum, secundo vero modo donum sapientiae. Et secundum hanc duplicem acceptionem eius quod est prius, ordo donorum duplex est[^9], et utroque modo rationabiliter inchoatur. — *Secundo* propter diversum modum ascendendi et descendendi habent diversimode ordinari. Quia enim in donis attenduntur gradus excellentiae et dignitatis; et ordo in ascendendo est ab inferiori ad superius, in descendendo vero est a superiori ad inferius: hinc est, quod aliquando praemittitur donum supremum, aliquando infimum. Utrumque tamen fit secundum ordinem rectum et congruum. — *Tertio* propter diversitatem autem principii efficientis et subiecti suscipientis similiter habent diversimode ordinari; quia principium producens est ipse Spiritus sanctus, in quo est summa perfectio; subiectum suscipiens est ipsum liberum arbitrium, in quo est imperfectio. Potest ergo in ordine praeponi donum, quod magis approximat perfectioni Spiritus sancti; et sic praemittitur donum sapientiae, quod est perfectissimum. Potest etiam nihilominus praemitti donum, quod magis approximat imperfectioni liberi arbitrii, et hoc quidem est donum timoris.

Et sic patet, quod ordo est in donis, et quod etiam ordo in enumerando servatur, sive quis incipiat a dono timoris, sive quis incipiat a dono sapientiae. Nec tantum est in eis ordo, verum etiam cum ordine est in eis combinatio. Quia enim dona sunt ad expediendum, sicut in praecedentibus[^10] fuit dictum; et qui vult expedite procedere, necesse est, ut praecognoscat et praevideat viam: hinc est, quod dona habent sua directiva sibi per appropriationem deputata, et quod quaedam in donis sunt regentia, quaedam recta, sive quaedam regulantia, quaedam exsequentia. In cuius rei signum Propheta dona enumeravit cum quadam combinatione et distinctione, sancto Spiritu instigante. — Concedendum est igitur, quod dona recte ordinantur et combinantur secundum assignationem propheticam. Et per haec quae dicta sunt, patet pro magna[^11] parte responsio ad obiecta.

**Ad argumenta:**

*Ad 1.* Ad illud enim quod primo obiicitur, quod progressus ordinatus debet esse ab inferiori ad superius; dicendum, quod illud est verum in ascendendo, et quando aliqua ordinantur secundum ordinem generationis; hoc autem non est verum in descendendo, et quando aliqua ordinantur secundum dignitatis ordinem; et hoc secundo modo est ordo in donis, sicut iam tactum est in praedictis.

*Ad 2.* Ad illud ergo quod obiicitur, quod habitus spectans ad cognitionem praecedit habitum, qui spectat ad affectionem; dicendum, quod illud est verum de habitibus pure affectivis, qui indigent alio regulante, sicut patet in pietate et fortitudine; hoc autem non habet locum in habitu sapientiae, quoniam ipsa habet intra se cognitionem experientiae, quae adeo dirigit et allicit, quod circa usum illius doni vix aut nunquam habet error accidere. Et propter hoc dicit quaedam Glossa[^12], quod donum sapientiae donum intellectus habet dirigere; quod ideo dictum est, quia cognitio experimentalis de divina suavitate amplificat cognitionem speculativam de divina veri-

<!-- page 749 -->

tate; secreta enim Dei amicis et familiaribus consueverunt revelari.

*Ad 3.* Ad illud quod ulterius quaeritur, quod aut ordinantur secundum ordinem dignitatis etc.; dicendum, quod Isaias ordinat ea secundum ordinem dignitatis, sicut tactum est supra; nec valet illa instantia, quam adducit de pietate respectu scientiae, et fortitudine[^13] respectu consilii. Nam illa duo merito praeponuntur aliis duobus ordine dignitatis, sicut regens praeponitur exsequenti.

*Ad 4.* Ad illud quod obiicitur de combinatione, quod virtutes non combinantur, ergo nec dona; dicendum, quod non est simile, quia maior exigitur concursus habituum ad operationis rectificationem et expeditionem quam ad rectificationem solum. Rectitudo enim consistit in ordine potentiae ad obiectum, sed expeditio non tantum in hoc consistit, sed etiam in hoc et in adiutorio habitus annexi.

*Ad 5.* Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod tunc deberent esse octo; dicendum, quod illud est verum, si quodlibet donum haberet cui combinaretur; sed donum timoris alii non combinatur, quia non habet donum directivum sibi appropriatum.

Sed tunc restat quaestio, unde hoc sit, sicut ultimo quaerebatur. Ad hoc autem dicendum, quod non est simile de dono timoris et de aliis, quia, cum sit infimum inter dona, satis habet dirigi per habitum fidei[^14]; non sic autem est de donis excellentioribus. — Praeterea, licet respectu oppositorum sit alia et alia affectio, una tamen potest esse oppositorum cognitio; ideo per habitus cognitivos, per quos diriguntur et regulantur alii habitus affectivi expedientes ad bonum, dirigi et regulari habet donum timoris, quod expedit ad fugiendum malum: et hac de causa non habet donum directivum distinctum a directivis aliorum donorum.

english:
<!-- page 747 -->

### Question II. *On the ordering and combination of the gifts.*

Secondly it is asked concerning the order and combination of the gifts, which two things Isaiah very pointedly intimates in the enumeration of the aforesaid gifts, in chapter eleven[^1], where he thus speaks of Christ: *The Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him: the spirit of wisdom and of understanding, the spirit of counsel and of fortitude, the spirit of knowledge and of piety; and the spirit of the fear of the Lord shall fill him.*

**Arguments against the order:**

1. *First* it is objected against the order: for, since an ordered progress should be[^2] from the lower to the higher, and the gift of wisdom is the greatest, but the gift of fear the least: since therefore it places the gift of wisdom in the first place, but the gift of fear last; it does not seem to order the gifts in right order.

2. Likewise, a habit regarding cognition precedes a habit which regards affection: since therefore wisdom, called from "savor"[^3], regards the affective power, but understanding regards the cognitive power; it seems that the gift of understanding should be set before the gift of wisdom.

3. Likewise, either the gifts are ordered according to the order of greater and lesser dignity, or according to the order of priority and posteriority[^4]. If in the first way: therefore since fortitude is of greater perfection than counsel, and piety than knowledge, they ought to be set before them and not after. If according to the order of priority and posteriority; thus, since that which is on the side of the cognitive precedes that which is on the side of the affective; it seems that understanding should be set before wisdom. But if you say that understanding is set before wisdom in ascending; then likewise it is asked: why is knowledge not set before piety, and counsel before fortitude, in ascending, but rather the contrary?

**Arguments against the combination:**

4. Likewise, it is objected against the combination: for the habits of the virtues are not combined with one another, but rather are distinguished singly: therefore by parity of reason neither are the habits of the gifts.

5. Likewise, if the gifts are combined with one another; since combination is only in an even number, therefore it seems that there should be more than seven.

6. Likewise, since every gift regarding affection has its own directive[^5], it seems that the gift of fear too should have its own directive, with which it would be combined; but if it does not have one, it seems that neither should the others have one.

It is asked therefore, what is the reason for combining and ordering[^6] the gifts; and why this sort of combination and order is assigned in the habits of the gifts rather than in the differences of other gratuitous habits.

<!-- page 748 -->

### Conclusion

> The gifts of the Holy Spirit are rightly ordered and combined according to the assignment of Isaiah.

**I respond:** For the understanding of the aforesaid it must be noted that in the gifts there is an order according to the degree of excellence and dignity; and this as regards the uses of the gifts themselves, according to which the soul comes to be placed in a more perfect and worthier state, inasmuch as according to the use of the gift of wisdom it is more loftily elevated than according to the use of the gift of fear. For to the use of that gift no one attains, unless first an exercise in the use of fear be sent before. Since therefore there is in them an order according to the degrees of excellence and dignity; not by chance and fortune, but very reasonably are certain gifts set before certain others; and now thus, now contrariwise are they ordered, not on account of a reversal of order, but on account of a diverse reason of ordering. For as Augustine says *On the Sermon of the Lord on the Mount*[^7], sometimes the enumeration of the gifts begins from the first, namely from fear, as the Lord intimates in Matthew; sometimes from the highest, namely from wisdom, as is written in Isaiah.

Each manner of ordering is right and fitting, and this for a threefold reason: both on account of the diverse manner of taking the prior and the posterior; and on account of the diversity of the manner of ascending and descending from the higher to the lower; and on account of the diversity of principles with respect to the habit itself. — *First*, on account of the diverse manner of taking the prior and the posterior; for, as the Philosopher holds[^8], a thing is prior in generation and time; a thing is prior in completion and definition or dignity. In the first way the gift of fear is first as regards use, but in the second way the gift of wisdom. And according to this twofold acceptation of that which is prior, the order of the gifts is twofold[^9], and in either way it is reasonably begun. — *Secondly*, on account of the diverse manner of ascending and descending they have to be ordered in diverse ways. For since in the gifts the degrees of excellence and dignity are attended to; and the order in ascending is from the lower to the higher, but in descending is from the higher to the lower: hence it is that sometimes the highest gift is set first, sometimes the lowest. Yet each comes about according to a right and fitting order. — *Thirdly*, on account of the diversity of the efficient principle and of the receiving subject they likewise have to be ordered in diverse ways; for the producing principle is the Holy Spirit himself, in whom is the highest perfection; the receiving subject is free choice itself, in which is imperfection. Therefore in the order the gift can be set first which more nearly approaches the perfection of the Holy Spirit; and thus the gift of wisdom is set first, which is most perfect. The gift can also nonetheless be set first which more nearly approaches the imperfection of free choice, and this indeed is the gift of fear.

And thus it is plain that there is an order in the gifts, and that the order is also preserved in enumerating, whether one begins from the gift of fear, or begins from the gift of wisdom. Nor only is there order in them, but together with the order there is in them combination. For since the gifts are for making apt, as was said in what precedes[^10]; and whoever wishes to proceed readily, it is necessary that he foreknow and foresee the way: hence it is that the gifts have their directives appointed to them by appropriation, and that certain of the gifts are ruling, certain ruled, or certain regulating, certain executing. In sign of which thing the Prophet enumerated the gifts with a certain combination and distinction, the Holy Spirit prompting him. — It must therefore be granted that the gifts are rightly ordered and combined according to the prophetic assignment. And by these things which have been said, the answer to the objections is for the great[^11] part plain.

**To the arguments:**

*To 1.* As to what is first objected, that an ordered progress ought to be from the lower to the higher; it must be said that this is true in ascending, and when things are ordered according to the order of generation; but this is not true in descending, and when things are ordered according to the order of dignity; and in this second way is the order in the gifts, as has already been touched on in the foregoing.

*To 2.* As to what is objected, that a habit regarding cognition precedes a habit which regards affection; it must be said that this is true of purely affective habits, which need another to regulate them, as is plain in piety and fortitude; but this has no place in the habit of wisdom, since it has within itself the cognition of experience, which so directs and allures, that about the use of that gift error scarcely or never happens to occur. And on account of this a certain Gloss says[^12] that the gift of wisdom has to direct the gift of understanding; which is therefore said because experimental cognition of the divine sweetness amplifies the speculative cognition of the divine truth;

<!-- page 749 -->

for the secrets of God are wont to be revealed to friends and intimates.

*To 3.* As to what is further asked, that either they are ordered according to the order of dignity etc.; it must be said that Isaiah orders them according to the order of dignity, as was touched on above; nor does that instance avail which it adduces concerning piety with respect to knowledge, and fortitude[^13] with respect to counsel. For those two are deservedly set before the other two by the order of dignity, just as a ruler is set before one who executes.

*To 4.* As to what is objected concerning combination, that the virtues are not combined, therefore neither are the gifts; it must be said that it is not alike, because a greater concurrence of habits is required for the setting-right and making-apt of an operation than for the setting-right alone. For rectitude consists in the order of a power to its object, but the making-apt consists not only in this, but also in this and in the help of an annexed habit.

*To 5.* As to what is objected, that there should then be eight; it must be said that this is true, if every gift had one to which it would be combined; but the gift of fear is not combined with another, because it does not have a directive gift appropriated to itself.

But then there remains a question, whence this is, as was asked last. To this, however, it must be said that it is not alike concerning the gift of fear and concerning the others, because, since it is the lowest among the gifts, it is sufficiently directed by the habit of faith[^14]; but it is not so concerning the more excellent gifts. — Moreover, although with respect to opposites there is one and another affection, yet there can be one cognition of opposites; and therefore through the cognitive habits, through which the other affective habits making apt for good are directed and regulated, the gift of fear, which makes apt for fleeing evil, has to be directed and regulated: and for this cause it does not have a directive gift distinct from the directives of the other gifts.

en: Verses 2–3 (Isa. 11:2–3).

la: Cod. Z *incipere*.

en: Cod. Z reads *incipere*.

la: Cfr. supra pag. 612, nota 3. — Edd. perperam *sapere*.

en: Cfr. above pag. 612, nota 3. — The editions wrongly read *sapere*.

la: Vide Aristot., de Praedicam. c. *de Priori*, et V. Metaph. text. 16. (IV. c. 11.).

en: See Aristotle, *Categories*, the chapter *On the Prior*, and *Metaphysics* V, text 16 (IV, c. 11).

la: Edd. adiiciunt *cum quo combinetur*.

en: The editions add *with which it would be combined*.

la: Cod. A subdit *potius*.

en: Cod. A adds *potius* (rather).

la: Libr. I. c. 4. n. 11: *Sed interest ordinis; nam ibi [in Isaia] enumeratio ab excellentioribus coepit, hic [in Matth. 5, 3.] vero ab inferioribus. Ibi namque incipit a sapientia et desinit ad timorem Dei; sed initium sapientiae timor Domini [Eccli. 1, 16.] est* etc. Cfr. Gregor., II. Homil. in Ezech. homil. 7. n. 7. — Mox pro *a primo* Vat. substituit *ab infimo* et paulo inferius post *Uterque* interserit cum edd. 1, 2 *tamen*.

en: Book I, c. 4, n. 11: *But it makes a difference of order; for there [in Isaiah] the enumeration began from the more excellent, but here [in Matt. 5:3] from the lower. For there it begins from wisdom and ends at the fear of God; but the beginning of wisdom is the fear of the Lord [Eccli. 1:16]*, etc. Cfr. Gregory, *Homilies on Ezechiel* II, homily 7, n. 7. — Shortly, for *a primo* the Vatican edition substitutes *ab infimo*, and a little below after *Uterque* it inserts with edd. 1, 2 *tamen*.

la: Vide supra pag. 747, nota 6.

en: See above pag. 747, nota 6.

la: Vat. *dupliciter assignatur* vel *est duplex*.

en: The Vatican edition reads *dupliciter assignatur* or *est duplex*.

la: Quaest. praeced. et a. 1. q. 1.

en: The preceding question and a. 1, q. 1.

la: Edd. *maiori*.

en: The editions read *maiori*.

la: B. Albert., hic a. 4: *Glossa quaedam super Isaiam*; sed Glossa ordinaria apud Strabum et Lyranum in Isai. 11, 2. (sumta ex Hieronymo) nihil huiusmodi dicit. A re autem non multum aliena esse videntur illa verba Gregorii, I. Moral. c. 32. n. 45: «Valde inutilis intellectus est, si ex sapientia non subsistat, quia, cum altiora sine sapientiae pondere penetrat, sua illum levitas gravius ruiturum levat». Idem Gregorius, II. Homil. in Ezech. homil. 7. n. 7. verba Isai. 11, 2. exponens, de intellectu et sapientia dicit: *Ab intellectu ergo ascendatur ad sapientiam, ut hoc quod acute intellectus invenit, sapientia mature disponat*. Cfr. infra lit. Magistri, d. XXXV. c. 2. et ibid. Comment. q. 1. et 3. — Superius pro *alio regulante* codd. H K Z *aliquo regulante*.

en: B. Albert, here a. 4: *A certain Gloss on Isaiah*; but the Ordinary Gloss in Strabo and Lyra on Isa. 11:2 (taken from Jerome) says nothing of this kind. Yet not much foreign to the matter seem those words of Gregory, *Morals* I, c. 32, n. 45: «Understanding is altogether useless, if it does not subsist from wisdom, because, when it penetrates loftier things without the weight of wisdom, its own lightness raises it the more grievously to fall». The same Gregory, *Homilies on Ezechiel* II, homily 7, n. 7, expounding the words of Isa. 11:2, says of understanding and wisdom: *From understanding therefore let one ascend to wisdom, that what understanding has keenly found, wisdom may maturely dispose*. Cfr. below the text of the Master, d. XXXV, c. 2, and there the Commentary, q. 1 and 3. — Above, for *alio regulante* codd. H K Z read *aliquo regulante*.

la: Sic Vat. rectius quam codd. et edd. 1, 2, qui exhibent *fortitudinis*.

en: So the Vatican edition, more correctly than the codices and edd. 1, 2, which present *fortitudinis*.

la: Cfr. hic lit. Magistri, c. 5. — De ratione seq. vide supra d. 26. a. 2. q. 1. ad 1. et 2. — Inferius pro *habitus cognitivos* codd. A F H I L V Z aa bb *habitus cognitionis*.

en: Cfr. here the text of the Master, c. 5. — On the reason of what follows see above d. 26, a. 2, q. 1, ad 1 and 2. — Below, for *habitus cognitivos* codd. A F H I L V Z aa bb read *habitus cognitionis*.

latin_scholion:
**I.** Haec quaestio versatur circa duo, scilicet tum circa *ordinem dignitatis* donorum, et de hoc agit S. Thom. (S. I. II. q. 68. a. 7.) quaerens: *Utrum dignitas donorum attendatur secundum enumerationem Isaiae 11*; tum circa eorum *combinationem*, cum in loco Isaiae bina dona copulentur voci *Spiritus*, excepto dono *timoris*; de qua exceptione in fine quaestionis specialiter agitur (cfr. S. Thom., hic q. 1. a. 2. ad 3.). De eadem quaestione: B. Albert., hic a. 4; Petr. a Tar., hic q. 1. a. 3. quaestiunc. 2.

**II.** Circa seq. (3.) quaestionem communiter docetur, quod omnia ista dona in patria sint quoad *habitum* perfectissimum, et etiam quoad eos *actus*, qui non sunt circa materiam repugnantem statui gloriae. Ex quo S. Thom. (hic q. 1. a. 3.) ad mentem nostri Doctoris infert, quod dona, quae pertinent ad vitam *activam*, non remanebunt quoad actus, quos habent circa *propriam materiam*; remanebunt tamen quoad «actus, quos habent circa Deum, qui est mensura operationis in illis». — Sed Durand. (hic q. 3.) asserit, nullum remanere actum quatuor donorum, nempe consilii, fortitudinis, pietatis et timoris, quia ipse putat, nihil impedire, quin habitus ibi remaneat sine actu (cfr. supra d. 31. a. 2. q. 1, scholion). De hac (3.) quaestione praeter locos citt.: S. Thom., S. I. II. q. 68. a. 6. — B. Albert., hic a. 5. — Petr. a Tar., hic q. 1. a. 5. — Richard. a Med., hic a. 1. q. 4. — Dionys. Carth., hic q. 2.

---

english_scholion:
**I.** This question turns upon two things, namely both upon the *order of dignity* of the gifts, and concerning this St. Thomas treats (S. I. II. q. 68, a. 7.) asking: *Whether the dignity of the gifts is attended to according to the enumeration of Isaiah 11*; and upon their *combination*, since in the passage of Isaiah the gifts are coupled two by two to the word *Spirit*, except for the gift of *fear*; concerning which exception it is specially treated at the end of the question (cfr. St. Thomas, here q. 1, a. 2, ad 3.). On the same question: B. Albert, here a. 4; Peter of Tarentaise, here q. 1, a. 3, quaestiuncula 2.

**II.** Concerning the following (3rd) question it is commonly taught that all these gifts are in the fatherland as to the most perfect *habit*, and also as to those *acts* which are not about matter repugnant to the state of glory. From which St. Thomas (here q. 1, a. 3.) infers, in keeping with the mind of our Doctor, that the gifts which pertain to the *active* life will not remain as to the acts which they have about their *proper matter*; yet they will remain as to «the acts which they have about God, who is the measure of operation in them». — But Durandus (here q. 3.) asserts that no act of the four gifts remains, namely of counsel, fortitude, piety, and fear, because he thinks that nothing prevents the habit from remaining there without act (cfr. above d. 31, a. 2, q. 1, scholion). On this (3rd) question, besides the places cited: St. Thomas, S. I. II. q. 68, a. 6. — B. Albert, here a. 5. — Peter of Tarentaise, here q. 1, a. 5. — Richard of Mediavilla, here a. 1, q. 4. — Dionysius the Carthusian, here q. 2.

---

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** RENAMED from `bon-sent-III-d34-p1-a1-q2-dup2.md` (auto-chunked 2026-06-02, mislabeled `a1`) and promoted to Tier 2 (2026-06-12) via `git mv` (history preserved). The `-dup2` triple is ARTICULUS II's q1/q2/q3; this is the correctly-located **a2-q2** (ART. II *Secundo*, *de ordine et combinatione donorum*). Latin re-set from 450 dpi PDF column bands (`/tmp/colcrop/vol3-p{747,748,749}-{L,R}-{0,1,2}.png`) per the Vol III two-column PDF-priority inversion: the IA djvu OCR (raw 51892–52039) is cascade-shattered through the Respondeo *triplex-ratio* and across every footer band, so the column-band PDF read is authoritative there; the OCR served only the clean *videtur* / *contra* running args and footnote-marker spacing. Offset pdf = printed + 22; running-head TEXT (`DIST. XXXIV. P. I. ART. II. QUAEST. II/III.`) trusted over OCR'd digits (raw running heads were intact this span).

**Opener alignment.** PASS 1:1. ART. II *Secundo* (TRACTATIO member *de ordine et combinatione*) = QUAESTIO II header *De donorum ordinatione et combinatione*; body opener *Secundo quaeritur de donorum ordine et combinatione, quae duo valde signanter innuit Isaias…*. The header gloss-line and the opener match the TRACTATIO's second member exactly. `title_la` is composed as a standard *Utrum*-question from the matter (the source prints a topical gloss-title, not an *Utrum*); `title_en` mirrors it short.

**Argument numbering note.** The printed text numbers the six fundamenta 1–3 (*contra ordinem*) then 4–6 (*contra combinationem*), each block flagged by a marginal heading (`Argg. contra ordinem.` / `Argg. contra combinationem.`). The IA OCR garbled the second block's openers (printed `4.` rendered as the bullet `(').`, and the printed `5.`/`6.` shifted); the PDF column bands give the clean 1-2-3 / 4-5-6 sequence reproduced here.

**Page span / page-split map.** Body opens p.747 (R-col QUAESTIO II header beside a2-q1's tail; the q2 opener + six fundamenta fill p.747 both columns below the a2-q1 SCHOLION), CONCLUSIO + Respondeo *triplex-ratio* on p.748, replies + the incident *Quaestio* + this q2's own SCHOLION §I–II on p.749 (closing just before the `QUAESTIO III.` header = sibling a2-q3, raw 52040). Per-page footer map (NOTAE AD COMMENTARIUM, Quaracchi per-page restart, renumbered continuous here):
- **p.747** nn.4–9 → `[^1]`–`[^6]` (PICKED UP — a2-q1 took p.747 nn.1–3; these six anchor the q2 opener + fundamenta: n.4 `capitulo⁴`, n.5 `esse⁵`, n.6 `sapore⁶`, n.7 `posterioritatis⁷`, n.8 `directivum⁸`, n.9 `assignantur` in the closing *Quaeritur ergo*).
- **p.748** nn.1–6 → `[^7]`–`[^12]` (n.1 `monte¹`, n.2 `Philosophus²`, n.3 `duplex est³`, n.4 `praecedentibus⁴`, n.5 `magna⁵`, n.6 `Glossa⁶`; n.1 and n.6 are long composite notes spanning into the R-col footer).
- **p.749** nn.1–2 → `[^13]`–`[^14]` (CROSS-QUESTION SPLIT: the p.749 page footer is shared with a2-q3. n.1 `fortitudine¹` [*Ad 3*] and n.2 `fidei²` / *habitus cognitivos* [incident *Quaestio*] anchor THIS q2's replies; the remaining p.749 footers nn.3–7 anchor a2-q3's *Fundamenta* and are forwarded to it). The SCHOLION carries no apparatus markers.

**Apparatus count = 14.** 6 (p.747) + 6 (p.748) + 2 (p.749) = 14 physical Quaracchi footer notes anchored in this q2's body. Every rendered `[^N]` has a matching anchor in BOTH the Latin and English bodies (14/14 markers pair clean). All markers anchor inside the fundamenta / Respondeo / replies body; the SCHOLION carries none.

**Scholion disposition.** `has_scholion: true`. q2 carries its **OWN** SCHOLION §I–II (printed p.749, OCR `SCHOLION.` at raw ~52023; §I in p.749 L-col bottom, §II bridging L→R-col bottom), placed body-then-scholion LAST in each language block per the parser rule. This was diagnosed (not assumed): a2-q1's master scholion §II was q1-specific (a *De eadem quaestione* dossier on q.1 a.2, NOT a `pro quaest. seq.` forward), so q2 was expected to carry its own — confirmed by the `SCHOLION.` header inside q2's range. **§I** = the *ordo dignitatis* + *combinatio* framing of THIS question (S. Thom. S. I.II q.68 a.7 on Isaiah's order; the two-by-two coupling to *Spiritus* except *timor*; B. Albert, Petr. a Tar.). **§II** opens *Circa seq. (3.) quaestionem…* — it is a forward note ABOUT a2-q3's matter (whether the gifts remain in the Beati: S. Thom./Durand. dispute, then a *De hac (3.) quaestione* cross-ref dossier). This §II is q2's printed scholion text (it physically prints under q2's body, before the QUAESTIO III header) but its content previews q3; it is NOT a redirect that q3 should point back to for its own scholion, so a2-q3 still carries whatever scholion prints in its own range.

**Footer hand-offs.** PICKED UP from a2-q1: the p.747 footer band nn.4–9 (→ `[^1]`–`[^6]`); a2-q1 kept p.747 nn.1–3 (its *Ad 5* tail + *Ad 6*). FORWARDED to `d34-p1-a2-q3`: the **p.749 page footer splits at the q2/q3 seam** — q2 keeps p.749 nn.1–2 (`[^13]`–`[^14]`, anchoring its *Ad 3* + incident-*Quaestio*); **a2-q3 should pick up p.749 nn.3–7** (n.3 `Hic c. 2`; n.4 `Vers. 2. Cfr. hic lit. Magistri c. 3… possunt`; n.5 `Dist. 33. q. 6. — Maior probata est supra…`; n.6 `Psalm. 18, 10… permanens`; n.7 `Art. 1. q. 1… ibi`) anchoring its *Fundamenta* (its `littera²`, `undecimo⁴`, `Psalmo⁶`, `supra⁷` markers). Note n.2/`[^14]` here also carries the *lit. Magistri c. 5* clause which Quaracchi prints once on the shared page; a2-q3's own *Fundamenta* arg 1 (`littera²`) cross-refers the same lit. Magistri material — when building a2-q3, anchor its `littera²` to that page's note independently rather than re-claiming this `[^14]`. The SCHOLION §II is a forward preview of q3's matter, not a redirect target.

**`[?]` flags.** NONE — all three PDF pages (747–749) legible at 450 dpi; the cascade-shattered OCR Respondeo and footer regions were fully recoverable from the column bands.

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