title: Dist. 21, Part 1

title_alt: De peccatis quae post hanc vitam dimittuntur; De confessione generali (Littera Magistri, Pars I, Caps. I–VI; Pars II, Caps. VII–IX, pp. 543–545)

title_alt: On the sins that are remitted after this life; On general confession (the Master's text, Part I, Chaps. I–VI; Part II, Chaps. VII–IX, pp. 543–545)

source_text:
<!-- page 543 -->

> The numbered footnotes below correspond to markers in both the Latin body above and the English translation. These are the *NOTAE AD LIBR. SENTENTIARUM* (notes to the Lombard text). Quaracchi restarts footnote numbering on each printed page and prints them per column; within this file the markers are numbered continuously 1–14 across the whole Master's text (Pars I + Pars II). Page-block split: 1–3 = p.543 (the LIBR. SENTENTIARUM footer in the right column; the left-column `' ² ' * ^ '` footer of p.543 belongs to the preceding d.20 COMMENTARIUS and is forwarded); 4–9 = p.544 (left-column footers 1–4, right-column footers 5–6); 10–14 = p.545 (left-column footers 1–3 = 10–13, right-column footers 4–5 = 14), which carry the Master's **Pars II** littera (Caps. VII–IX, *De confessione generali*) now rendered in this same chunk.

### Pars I.

### Cap. I. *De peccatis, quae post hanc vitam dimittuntur.*

Solet etiam quaeri, utrum post hanc vitam aliqua peccata remittantur. Quod aliqua post hanc vitam remittantur, Christus ostendit in Evangelio, ubi ait[^1]: *Qui peccaverit in Spiritum sanctum, non remittetur ei, neque in hoc saeculo neque in futuro.* Ex quo datur intelligi, sicut sancti doctores tradunt, quod quaedam peccata in futuro dimittentur. «Quaedam enim culpae in hoc saeculo relaxantur, quaedam vero parvae etiam in futuro; quae quidem post mortem gravant, sed dimittuntur, si digni sunt, si bonis actibus in hac vita meruerunt, ut dimittantur eis[^2]».

### Cap. II. *De his qui aedificant aurum, argentum, lapides pretiosos, lignum, foenum, stipulam.*

De illis etiam, qui aedificant lignum, foenum, stipulam, dicit Augustinus[^3] quod ignem tribulationis transitoriae invenient, cremabilia aedificia, quae secum portaverunt, cremantem. Ait enim sic: «Post istius sane corporis mortem, donec de igne purgatorio veniatur ad diem damnationis et remunerationis, si hoc temporis intervallo spiritus defunctorum, qui aedificaverunt lignum, foenum, stipulam, huiusmodi ignem dicantur perpeti, quem alii non sentiunt, qui huiusmodi aedificia non portaverunt, ut inveniant ignem transitoriae tribulationis, venialia concremantem; non

<!-- page 544 -->

redarguo, quia forsitan verum est». «Sed quia dicitur: *Salvus erit quasi per ignem*, contemnitur ille ignis. Gravior tamen erit ignis ille, quam quidquid potest homo pati in hac vita[^4]». — Hic aperte insinuatur, quod illi qui aedificant lignum, foenum, stipulam, quaedam cremabilia aedificia, id est venialia peccata, secum portant, quae in igne emendatorio cremantur. Unde constat, quaedam peccata venialia post hanc vitam deleri.

### Cap. III. *De igne purgatorio, quo alii citius, alii tardius purgantur.*

In illo autem igne purgatorio alii tardius, alii citius purgantur, secundum quod ista pereuntia magis vel minus amaverunt. Unde Augustinus[^5]: «Post hanc vitam incredibile non est nonnullos fideles per ignem quendam purgatorium, quanto magis minusve bona pereuntia dilexerunt, tanto tardius citiusque salvari».

### Cap. IV. *Quid sit aedificare lignum, foenum, stipulam.*

«Unde non frustra illa tria distinxit Apostolus lignum, foenum, stipulam, quae illi aedificant, qui, etsi aliena non rapiant, rebus tamen infirmitati concessis aliqua dilectione inhaerent; qui secundum suos amandi modos diutius, ut lignum, vel minus, ut foenum, vel minimum, ut stipula, ignem sustinebunt. Qui vero superaedificant aurum, argentum et lapidem pretiosum, de utroque igne securi sunt, non solum de illo aeterno, qui cruciaturus est impios in aeternum, sed etiam de illo emendatorio, quo purgabuntur quidam salvandi[^6]». Hic obiici potest: si per lignum, foenum, stipulam venialia intelliguntur peccata; et nullus adeo perfectus est, qui venialiter non peccet: ergo qui aedificant aurum, argentum, lapidem pretiosum, aedificant etiam lignum, foenum, stipulam; ergo per ignem transibunt. — Ad quod dicimus, quia non omnis qui venialiter peccat, lignum, foenum, stipulam aedificat; sicut e converso non omnis qui contemplatur Deum et diligit proximum et opera bona facit, aedificat aurum, argentum, lapidem pretiosum. Et tamen in auro intelligitur contemplatio Dei, in argento dilectio proximi, in lapide pretioso bona opera. Sed illi qui aedificant lignum, foenum, stipulam, Deum contemplantur et proximum diligunt et opera bona faciunt, nec tamen aedificant aurum, argentum, lapidem pretiosum.

### Cap. V. *Quid sit aedificare aurum, argentum, lapides pretiosos.*

Haec enim aedificat qui sic illa tria facit, ut cogitet quae Dei sunt, et quomodo placeat Deo, non mundo. «Lignum vero et foenum et stipula accipi possunt saecularium rerum, quamvis licite concessarum, tales cupiditates, ut amitti sine animi dolore non possint[^7]». Haec ergo aedificat is qui cogitat quae mundi sunt, quomodo placeat mundo, «qui circa divitias suas quodam carnali affectu tenetur, et tamen ex eis multas eleemosynas facit nec pro eis aliquid fraudis vel rapinae molitur». — Ex his igitur patet, quod non idem homo simul haec et illa aedificat. Illa enim aedificatio perfectorum tantum est, qui non cogitant placere mundo, sed tantum Deo; qui etsi venialiter aliquando peccant, fervore caritatis ita absumitur in eis peccatum[^8] sicut gutta aquae in camino ignis; et ideo nunquam secum portant cremabilia. Haec autem inferior aedificatio minorum est, qui non tantum Deo, sed etiam mundo placere cogitant, Deum tamen praeponunt. Si vero mundum praeponerent, non superaedificarent, sed destruerent fundamentum. Affectiones igitur carnales, quibus dediti sunt domibus, coniugibus, possessionibus, ita ut nihil praeponant Christo, illis tribus significantur; quae in mentes perfectorum non cadunt, etsi alia venialia admittant; in cordibus vero minorum interdum durant usque in finem, qui cum talibus aedificiis transeunt, sed dissolventur in igne; ipsi vero merito fundamenti salvi erunt, gravissimam tamen poenam sentient. Ex quo apparet, quantam hic misericordiam exhibet Deus, et quantam ibi exerceat veritatem, cum pro eodem peccato multo gravius ibi puniat quam hic.

### Cap. VI. *Quod aliquem vere poenitet, etsi non de omni veniali.*

Sed forte dices, illud esse accipiendum de poena peccati, non de ipso peccato, quod Gregorius[^9] dicit, quaedam levia in futuro dimittenda. Si enim veram poenitentiam habuerit quis, omnia dimissa sunt ei, sed poena forte remansit; ideoque, si vere poenitens obiit, sine peccato transit; si autem vere poenitens non est in obitu, maculam portat, quae nunquam delebitur. Qui vero aedificat lignum, foenum, stipulam, vere poenitet, quia bonus est et caritatem habet et in caritate de hac vita transit: ergo sine peccato transit. — Non sequitur: verum quidem est, quia bonus est et

<!-- page 545 -->

caritatem habet et vere poenitet; et tamen cum veniali peccato transit, quod non delevit poenitentia. Poenitentia enim non delet nisi peccatum illud, quod deserit homo. Tale autem peccatum saepe in hac vita non relinquitur ab homine, et tamen vere poenitens est, etsi non de omnibus venialibus poeniteat. Potest enim quis de omni mortali et de omni veniali poenitere, excepto uno vel pluribus venialibus quidem; sicut habet quis caritatem et unum vel plura venialia; quod de criminalibus nullatenus esse potest. Est enim aliquis bonus caritatem habens, sed adhuc quodam cupiditatis affectu amans haec saecularia; talis existens subita morte opprimitur, in illo terreno affectu mortuus est, et tamen salvabitur, a quo non se hic absolvit: ergo post hanc vitam ab illo purgabitur. Constat ergo, quaedam peccata, sed levia, post hanc vitam dimitti. Si vero de poena peccati illud intelligi voluissent auctores, cur magis commemorassent levia quam gravia, cum etiam gravium poena hic inexpleta post hanc vitam restet?

### Pars II. *De confessione generali.*

### Cap. VII. *Quid sit generalis confessio.*

Post haec considerandum est, utrum[^10] prosit confessio illa, ubi singula peccata, quae quisque fecit, non exprimuntur. — Sane dici potest, quod omnia criminalia semel saltem oportet in confessione exprimi, nisi aliqua a mente exciderint. Sed quia delicta nemo intelligit omnia, generaliter saltem ea confitere, quorum memoriam non habes; et sic nihil celasti de sceleribus tuis. Venialia vero, quia innumerabilia sunt, sufficit generaliter confiteri, nisi aliqua sint frequenter iterata; perfectius est tamen etiam illa exprimere, si vales. Ideoque quotidie generaliter fit confessio in Ecclesia, pro venialibus scilicet peccatis, quae quotidie admittimus, et pro illis mortiferis, quorum notitiam non habemus. Unde Augustinus[^11]: «Veritatem dicit Deo poenitens, quando nihil illi de commissis sceleribus celat; non quod, etsi voluntate celaverit, Deus ignoret, sed veritatem sibi ab eo dici vult, ut veniam consequatur. Si vero mente aliqua exciderint, confitetur veritatem Deo, cum generaliter dixerit: Deus[^12] qui nosti occulta cordis, et opera mea et delicta a te non sunt abscondita, quibus veniam largiaris. Et haec est veritas confitentis, quam diligit Deus». Unde: *Ecce enim veritatem dilexisti.* — Hic insinuatur, quod generalis confessio etiam mortalia delet, quorum intelligentia non habetur.

### Cap. VIII. *Quod nemo debet confiteri peccata, quae non fecit.*

Sicut autem poenitens celare non debet peccatum, quia superbia est; ita nec humilitatis causa fateri se reum illius quod se non commisisse noscit, quia incauta est talis humilitas et peccatorem constituit. Unde Augustinus[^13]: «Cum humilitatis causa mentiris, si non eras peccator, antequam mentireris, mentiendo efficeris quod evitaveras. Veritas in te non est, nisi ita te dixeris peccatorem, ut etiam esse cognoscas. Veritas autem ipsa est, ut quod es dicas. Nam quomodo est veritas, ubi regnat falsitas»?

### Cap. IX. *De poena sacerdotis, qui peccata confitentis publicat.*

«Caveat autem sacerdos, ne peccata confitentium aliis prodat, alioquin deponatur. Unde Gregorius: Sacerdos ante omnia caveat, ne de his qui confitentur peccata, alicui recitet, non propinquis, non extraneis, nec, quod absit, pro aliquo scandalo. Nam si hoc fecerit, deponatur et omnibus diebus vitae suae ignominiosus peregrinando pergat». «Quod vero dictum est, ut poenitens eligat sacerdotem scientem ligare et solvere, videtur contrarium[^14] ei quod in canonibus reperitur, ut nemo scilicet alterius parochianum iudicare praesumat. Sed aliud est favore vel odio proprium sacerdotem contemnere, quod canones prohibent, aliud caecum vitare, quod Urbanus facere monet, ne, si caecus caecum ducat, ambo in foveam cadant». Ait enim Urbanus secundus: «Placuit, ut nulli sacerdotum deinceps liceat quemlibet commissum alteri sacerdoti ad poenitentiam suscipere sine eius consensu, cui se prius commisit, nisi pro ignorantia illius cui prius confessus est. Qui vero contra hoc facere tentaverit gradus sui periculo subiacebit».

---

english:
<!-- page 543 -->

### Part I.

### Chap. I. *On the sins that are remitted after this life.*

It is also wont to be asked whether after this life any sins are remitted. That some are remitted after this life, Christ shows in the Gospel, where He says[^1]: *Whoever shall sin against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world nor in [the world] to come.* From which it is given to be understood, as the holy doctors hand down, that certain sins will be remitted in the [world] to come. «For certain faults are released in this world, but certain small ones even in the [world] to come; which indeed weigh [upon a man] after death, but are remitted, if [men] are worthy, if by good acts in this life they have merited that they be remitted to them[^2]».

### Chap. II. *On those who build gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble.*

Concerning those also who build wood, hay, stubble, Augustine says[^3] that they will find a fire of transitory tribulation, burning the combustible buildings which they carried with them. For he says thus: «After the death of this body indeed, until one come, by the purgatorial fire, to the day of damnation and remuneration, if in this interval of time the spirits of the dead, who built wood, hay, stubble, are said to suffer a fire of this kind, which others do not feel, who did not carry buildings of this kind, so that they find a fire of transitory tribulation, burning up the venial [sins]; I do

<!-- page 544 -->

not gainsay [it], because perhaps it is true». «But because it is said: *He shall be saved, yet so as by fire*, that fire is despised. Yet that fire will be heavier than anything man can suffer in this life[^4]». — Here it is plainly intimated that those who build wood, hay, stubble, certain combustible buildings, that is, venial sins, carry [them] with [them], which are burned in the amending fire. Whence it is established that certain venial sins are blotted out after this life.

### Chap. III. *On the purgatorial fire, by which some are purged sooner, others later.*

But in that purgatorial fire some are purged later, some sooner, according as they loved these perishing things more or less. Whence Augustine[^5]: «After this life it is not incredible that some of the faithful are saved through a certain purgatorial fire, the more or less slowly and quickly the more or less they loved the perishing goods».

### Chap. IV. *What it is to build wood, hay, stubble.*

«Whence not in vain did the Apostle distinguish those three, wood, hay, stubble, which those build who, although they do not seize what belongs to another, yet cleave with some love to things conceded to [their] weakness; who according to their modes of loving will endure the fire longer, as wood, or less, as hay, or least, as stubble. But those who build upon [the foundation] gold, silver, and precious stone, are secure from both fires, not only from that eternal [fire], which will torment the impious for eternity, but also from that amending [fire], by which certain [who are] to be saved will be purged[^6]». Here it can be objected: if by wood, hay, stubble venial sins are understood; and no one is so perfect that he does not sin venially: therefore those who build gold, silver, precious stone, build also wood, hay, stubble; therefore they will pass through the fire. — To which we say that not everyone who sins venially builds wood, hay, stubble; just as conversely not everyone who contemplates God and loves [his] neighbor and does good works builds gold, silver, precious stone. And yet in gold is understood the contemplation of God, in silver the love of [one's] neighbor, in precious stone good works. But those who build wood, hay, stubble, contemplate God and love [their] neighbor and do good works, yet do not build gold, silver, precious stone.

### Chap. V. *What it is to build gold, silver, precious stones.*

For he builds these who so does those three that he thinks the things that are of God, and how he may please God, not the world. «But wood and hay and stubble can be taken to be such desires of worldly things, although lawfully conceded, as cannot be lost without grief of soul[^7]». This therefore he builds who thinks the things that are of the world, how he may please the world, «who is held about his riches by a certain carnal affection, and yet out of them gives many alms nor contrives any fraud or rapine for their sake». — From these things therefore it is plain that the same man does not build these and those at once. For that building is of the perfect only, who do not think to please the world, but God alone; who, although they sometimes sin venially, by the fervor of charity the sin is so consumed in them[^8] as a drop of water in a furnace of fire; and therefore they never carry combustible things with them. But this lower building is of the lesser, who think to please not only God, but also the world, yet set God before [it]. But if they were to set the world before [Him], they would not build upon [the foundation], but would destroy the foundation. Carnal affections therefore, by which they are given over to houses, spouses, possessions, so that they set nothing before Christ, are signified by those three; which fall not into the minds of the perfect, even if they admit other venial [sins]; but in the hearts of the lesser they sometimes last right up to the end, [men] who pass over with such buildings, but they will be dissolved in the fire; yet they themselves will be saved by the merit of the foundation, though they will feel a most grievous penalty. From which it appears how great a mercy God shows here, and how great a truth He exercises there, since for the same sin He punishes there much more grievously than here.

### Chap. VI. *That one truly repents, even if not of every venial [sin].*

But perhaps you will say that this is to be understood of the penalty of the sin, not of the sin itself, which Gregory[^9] says, that certain light [sins] are to be remitted in the [world] to come. For if anyone has had true penance, all [his sins] have been remitted to him, but the penalty perhaps remained; and therefore, if he died truly penitent, he passes without sin; but if he is not truly penitent at [his] death, he carries a stain which will never be blotted out. But he who builds wood, hay, stubble truly repents, because he is good and has charity and in charity passes from this life: therefore he passes without sin. — It does not follow: it is indeed true, because he is good and

<!-- page 545 -->

has charity and truly repents; and yet he passes with a venial sin, which penance did not blot out. For penance does not blot out except that sin which a man forsakes. But such a sin is often not relinquished by the man in this life, and yet he is truly penitent, even if he does not repent of all venial [sins]. For one can repent of every mortal and of every venial [sin], excepting one or several venial ones indeed; just as one has charity and one or several venial [sins]; which can in no way be the case with criminal [sins]. For there is some good man having charity, but still loving these worldly things with a certain affection of cupidity; such a one, existing [thus], is overwhelmed by sudden death, [and] has died in that earthly affection, and yet will be saved, [though] from it he did not absolve himself here: therefore after this life he will be purged of it. It is established therefore that certain sins, but light ones, are remitted after this life. But if the authors had wished that to be understood of the penalty of sin, why would they rather have mentioned light [sins] than grave ones, since even of grave [sins] the penalty, here unfinished, remains after this life?

### Part II. *On general confession.*

### Chap. VII. *What general confession is.*

After these things it must be considered whether[^10] that confession profits in which the individual sins which each one has committed are not expressed. — Indeed it can be said that all criminal [sins] must at least once be expressed in confession, unless any have slipped from the mind. But because no one is aware of all his offenses, confess at least in general those of which you have no memory; and thus you have concealed nothing of your crimes. But the venial [sins], because they are innumerable, it suffices to confess in general, unless any be frequently repeated; yet it is more perfect to express even those, if you are able. And therefore daily confession is made in general in the Church, namely for the venial sins which we daily commit, and for those deadly [sins] of which we have no knowledge. Whence Augustine[^11]: «The penitent tells the truth to God when he conceals nothing from Him of the crimes committed; not that, even if he should conceal [it] by his will, God would be ignorant, but He wills the truth to be told to Him by him, that he may obtain pardon. But if any [sins] have slipped from the mind, he confesses the truth to God when he has said in general: God[^12] who knowest the hidden things of the heart, both my works and my offenses are not hidden from Thee, for which mayest Thou bestow pardon. And this is the truth of the one confessing, which God loves». Whence: *For behold Thou hast loved truth.* — Here it is intimated that general confession blots out even mortal [sins] of which the understanding is not had.

### Chap. VIII. *That no one ought to confess sins which he has not done.*

But just as the penitent ought not to conceal a sin, because it is pride; so neither for the sake of humility [ought he] to confess himself guilty of that which he knows he has not committed, because such humility is incautious and constitutes [him] a sinner. Whence Augustine[^13]: «When for the sake of humility you lie, if you were not a sinner before you lied, by lying you become what you had avoided. Truth is not in you, unless you so call yourself a sinner that you also know yourself to be [one]. But the truth itself is that you say what you are. For how is there truth where falsity reigns»?

### Chap. IX. *On the penalty of the priest who publishes the sins of the one confessing.*

«But let the priest beware lest he disclose to others the sins of those confessing, otherwise let him be deposed. Whence Gregory: Let the priest before all things beware lest he recount to anyone [aught] of those who confess [their] sins, not to kinsmen, not to strangers, nor, which God forbid, for any scandal. For if he shall have done this, let him be deposed and go ignominiously on pilgrimage all the days of his life». «But as for what was said, that the penitent should choose a priest knowing [how] to bind and to loose, it seems contrary[^14] to that which is found in the canons, namely that no one should presume to judge another's parishioner. But it is one thing to despise one's own priest out of favor or hatred, which the canons forbid, [and] another to avoid a blind [guide], which Urban admonishes to do, lest, if a blind man lead a blind man, both fall into the pit». For Urban II says: «It has pleased [us] that henceforth it be permitted to none of the priests to receive for penance anyone committed to another priest without the consent of him to whom he first committed himself, except for the ignorance of him to whom he first confessed. But whoever shall attempt to do contrary to this shall lie under the peril of his rank».

---

la: Verbotenus in Glossa sup. loc. cit. Matth. apud Lyranum, sumta ex Gregor., IV. Dialog. c. 39, et est in C. *Qualis hinc* (4.), d. 25. — Pro *parvae etiam* edd. 3, 7, 8 *poenae etiam,* ed. 1 *poenae,* vel *parvae etiam,* Glossa cit. *parvae scilicet.*

en: Word-for-word in the Gloss on the cited passage of Matthew in Lyra, taken from Gregory, *Dialogues* IV, c. 39, and it is in the canon *Qualis hinc* (4), d. 25. — For *parvae etiam* edd. 3, 7, 8 [read] *poenae etiam,* ed. 1 *poenae,* or *parvae etiam,* the Gloss cited *parvae scilicet.*

la: Libr. XXI. de Civ. Dei, c. 26. n. 4 (cfr. Enchirid. c. 69. n. 18.), et respicitur I. Cor. 3, 12.

en: *On the City of God* XXI, c. 26, n. 4 (cf. *Enchiridion* c. 69, n. 18), and 1 Cor. 3:12 is regarded.

la: Enarrat. in Ps. 37. n. 3, ubi respicitur I. Cor. 3, 15.

en: Exposition on Ps. 37, n. 3, where 1 Cor. 3:15 is regarded.

la: Enchirid. c. 69. n. 18.

en: *Enchiridion* c. 69, n. 18.

la: Haec et quae sequuntur sumta sunt ex longiore Glossa loc. cit. et apud Lombard. ibid., quae collecta est ex Augustini locis variis, ut Enarrat. in Ps. 80. n. 21; in Ps. 37. n. 3; de Fide et operibus c. 13. 16.

en: These and what follow are taken from the longer Gloss at the cited place and in Lombard, ibid., which is collected from various places of Augustine, such as Exposition on Ps. 80, n. 21; on Ps. 37, n. 3; *On Faith and Works* c. 13, 16.

la: August., Enchirid. c. 68. n. 18. — Superius post *Deo* codd. A C D E omittunt *non mundo.* — Seq. locus est August., de Fide et operibus c. 16. n. 27, ubi pro *multas eleemosynas* edd., excepta I, *multa beneficia,* refragantibus codd. et originali.

en: Augustine, *Enchiridion* c. 68, n. 18. — Above, after *Deo* the codd. A C D E omit *non mundo.* — The following passage is from Augustine, *On Faith and Works* c. 16, n. 27, where for *multas eleemosynas* the editions, except I, [read] *multa beneficia,* against the codd. and the original.

la: Cfr. Gregor., II. Homil. in Evang., homil. 33. n. 1, et XVI. Moral. c. 67. n. 81, quoad sensum; Guliel. Antissiod. et Petr. a Tar. hunc locum tribuunt Augustino. In fine respicitur Ps. 84, 11.

en: Cf. Gregory, *Homilies on the Gospel* II, homily 33, n. 1, and *Morals* XVI, c. 67, n. 81, as to the sense; William of Auxerre and Peter of Tarentaise attribute this passage to Augustine. At the end Ps. 84:11 is regarded.

la: Libr. IV. Dialog. c. 39. Cfr. pag. 343, nota 2. — Infra edd., excepta 1, praefigunt *peccata* ante *omnia.*

en: *Dialogues* IV, c. 39. Cf. p. 343, note 2. — Below the editions, except 1, prefix *peccata* before *omnia.*

la: Solae edd., excepta 1, *quid.* — Infra respicitur Ps. 18, 13.

en: Only the editions, except 1, [add] *quid.* — Below Ps. 18:13 is regarded.

la: Libr. V. Hypognost. (inter Augustini opera) c. 1. n. 1, ubi citatur Ps. 68, 6, et inferius Ps. 50, 8. — In loco libri cit. post *largiaris* plurimae edd. addunt *precor.*

en: *Hypognosticon* V (among the works of Augustine) c. 1, n. 1, where Ps. 68:6 is cited, and below Ps. 50:8. — In the place of the cited book, after *largiaris* most editions add *precor.*

la: Cfr. praeced. notam (Ps. 50, 8).

en: Cf. the preceding note (Ps. 50:8).

la: Sermo 181. (alias 29. de Verbis Apost.) c. 1. n. 5; C. *Cum humilitatis* (9.), C. 22. q. 2.

en: Sermon 181 (otherwise 29, *On the Words of the Apostle*) c. 1, n. 5; the canon *Cum humilitatis* (9), C. 22, q. 2.

la: Ita in C. *Sacerdos ante* (2.), de Poenitent. d. 6. Non invenitur in Gregor. — Pro *qui* his cod. C et plures edd. *his qui,* refragantibus aliis et canone. — XVII. Dist. c. 4. — Haec sumta sunt ex Gratian. ad can. cit., et alluditur ad Matth. 15, 14. Verba Urbani ibi sequuntur in C. seq.

en: Thus in the canon *Sacerdos ante* (2), *On Penance* d. 6. It is not found in Gregory. — For *qui his* codex C and several editions [read] *his qui,* against the others and the canon. — Dist. XVII, c. 4. — These are taken from Gratian at the cited canon, and there is an allusion to Matt. 15:14. The words of Urban follow there in the next canon. ---

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** Latin re-set under the VOL II OVERRIDE PDF-priority inversion from the column-band reads (`/tmp/colcrop/vol4-p54{3,4,5}-{L,R}-{0,1,2}.png`, offset pdf = printed + 20 → PDF pp. 563–565), cross-checked against the cascade-fragmented IA djvu OCR (raw lines 60021–60174). Running heads verified: p.543 right column shows the printed page number `543` with `DIST. XXI. P. I.` at the head of the left column; p.544 `544 … SENTENTIARUM LIB. IV`; p.545 `DIST. XXI. P. II. … 545`. The d.21 littera Pars I opens in the p.543 left column (`DISTINCTIO XXI. / Pars I. / Cap. I. … Solet etiam quaeri, utrum post hanc vitam aliqua peccata remittantur`) after the tail of d.20's COMMENTARIUS (RESPONDEO on consulting the bishop, with its own NOTAE AD COMMENTARIUM in the left-column footer); printed_pages [543–545].

**Column flow.** Standard Quaracchi two-column littera filling the page top, with the commentary below. Reading order is left column top→bottom, then right column. Cap. I–II occupy p.543 (Cap. I + opener of Cap. II in L, Cap. II quote in R); Cap. II tail + Caps. III–IV fill p.544 L, Caps. V–VI fill p.544 R; the Cap. VI conclusion of Pars I runs into the p.545 left column (`caritatem habet…`) and closes in the p.545 right column with «…post hanc vitam restet?».

**Structure / scope.** This chunk is the Master's **Pars I** of d.XXI = Caps. I–VI (*De peccatis quae post hanc vitam dimittuntur* — venial sins remitted after this life; the wood/hay/stubble vs gold/silver/precious-stones of 1 Cor. 3:12–15 and the purgatorial fire). The Master's own **Pars II.** header (raw line 60179) opens with **Cap. VII** *Quid sit generalis confessio* in the p.545 right column — a distinct topic (general confession) that has its own *DIST. XXI. P. II. DUBIA* in the commentary — and is the **next littera chunk** (`bon-sent-IV-d21-p2-littera`), NOT rendered here. The single `COMMENTARIUS IN DISTINCTIONEM XXI. / Pars I. / De opportunitate temporis quoad remissionem venialium` begins on p.546 (raw line 60251) and is the Bonaventure commentary chunk.

**End boundary.** Pars I completes in the p.545 right column with «Si vero de poena peccati illud intelligi voluissent auctores, cur magis commemorassent levia quam gravia, cum etiam gravium poena hic inexpleta post hanc vitam restet?» (raw line ~60174). The `Pars II.` header (raw 60179) and Cap. VII onward are forwarded to d.21-p2-littera.

**Apparatus split / cross-chunk hand-off.** 9 littera notes rendered (`[^1]–[^9]`): 3 from p.543 (the *NOTAE AD LIBR. SENTENTIARUM* in the right column), 6 from p.544 (L-column footers 1–4, R-column footers 5–6). The p.543 **left-column** footer (`' ² ' * ^ '` = *Cfr. supra d.14 p.II dub.9 · Codd. IK supplent eum · Idem dub. solvunt B. Albert.… · Vide hic lit. Magistri c.6 · Vers.2. Cfr. supra q.3 in corp. · Idem dub. solvunt S. Thom.…*) is the d.20 COMMENTARIUS *NOTAE AD COMMENTARIUM* (cross-refs from the RESPONDEO/Dubia at the column head) and belongs to the **preceding d.20 commentary chunk** — forwarded, not rendered here. The **p.545 footers** (L: 1 *Solae edd.…Ps.18,13* · 2 *Libr. V. Hypognost.…Ps.68,6; Ps.50,8* · 3 *Sermo 181…C.22 q.2*; R: 4 *Ita in C. Sacerdos ante…* · 5 *Dist. XVII…Matth.15,14*) attach to the Master's **Pars II** littera (Caps. VII–IX, *generalis confessio*) and are **forwarded to the d.21-p2-littera chunk**.

**[?] flags.** None. OCR garbles resolved silently against the PDF bands: Cap. I `ait'`/`eis^` markers = LIBR. SENTENTIARUM notes 1–2 (not the d.20 commentary footer `' ²` in the same band); `dicit Augustinus ^` (Cap. II) = note 3 (*de Civ. Dei* XXI); the left-margin labels `Dubium 1.`/`Dubium 3.`/`Resp.`/`obiicitur`/`Augustinus`/`Gregor.` bleeding into the OCR are editorial cross-references/speaker tags to the following COMMENTARIUS dubia, not littera footnote markers, and are excluded; `pereuntia` (Cap. III, OCR `pereunlia`), `emendatorio` (OCR `cmendatorio`/`emendatorio`), and `concremantem` (OCR `concremautem`) confirmed against the PDF.


site: bonaventure

collection: Book IV: On the Sacraments

title: Dist. 21, Part 1, Divisio Textus

title_alt: Divisio textus et tractatio quaestionum, Pars I

title_alt: Division of the text and treatment of the questions, Part I

author: St. Bonaventure

languages: en la

title: Opera Omnia (Quaracchi critical edition)

publisher: Collegii S. Bonaventurae

source_text:
<!-- page 546 -->

### COMMENTARIUS IN DISTINCTIONEM XXI.

#### Pars I.

*De opportunitate temporis quoad remissionem venialium.*

> Solet etiam quaeri, utrum post hanc vitam etc.

### DIVISIO TEXTUS.

Supra egit Magister de temporis opportunitate quantum ad remissionem mortalium; hic secundo agit de opportunitate quantum ad remissionem venialium. Et habet haec pars duas. In prima procedit ad veritatem ostendendam. In secunda se exercet ad veritatem defendendam, ibi: *Hic obiici potest: si per lignum, foenum* etc.

Prima pars habet duas. In prima ostendit, a quibus homo purgetur in purgatorio, scilicet utrum a poena, an etiam a culpa, ostendens, quod a culpa. In secunda agit de diuturnitate purgationis, ibi: *In illo autem igne purgatorio* etc.

Similiter secunda pars, in qua veritatem ostensam defendit, habet duas. In prima enim dissolvit quandam sophisticam rationem. In secunda vero excludit quandam apparentem solutionem, ibi: *Sed forte dices, illud accipiendum esse* etc.

### TRACTATIO QUAESTIONUM.

Ad intelligentiam huius partis incidit hic quaestio de purgatione peccatorum post hanc vitam. Ad quod intelligendum tria quaeruntur.

Primo quaeritur de purgatione peccatorum ante purgatorium.

Secundo, de purgatione per purgatorium.

Tertio, de liberatione a purgatorio.

Circa primum, cum in praecedentibus[^1] sit quaesitum de iustificatione a mortalibus, quaeritur hic de deletione venialium. Circa quam duo quaeruntur.

Primo quaeritur, utrum venialia possint deleri sine gratia.

Secundo, utrum possint deleri a gratia sine poenitentia.

### ARTICULUS I.

#### *De purgatione peccatorum venialium in hac vita.*

### QUAESTIO I.

#### *Utrum peccata venialia possint deleri sine gratia.*

---

english:
<!-- page 546 -->

### COMMENTARY ON DISTINCTION XXI.

#### Part I.

*On the opportune time as regards the remission of venial [sins].*

> It is also wont to be asked, whether after this life, etc.

### DIVISION OF THE TEXT.

Above the Master treated of the opportune time as regards the remission of mortal [sins]; here, secondly, he treats of the opportune time as regards the remission of venial [sins]. And this part has two [sections]. In the first he proceeds to the showing of the truth. In the second he sets himself to defend the truth, there: *Here it can be objected: if through wood, hay,* etc.

The first part has two [sections]. In the first he shows by what a man is purged in purgatory, namely whether from punishment, or also from fault, showing that [he is purged] from fault. In the second he treats of the duration of the purgation, there: *But in that purgatorial fire,* etc.

Likewise the second part, in which he defends the truth that has been shown, has two [sections]. For in the first he dissolves a certain sophistical argument. But in the second he excludes a certain apparent solution, there: *But perhaps you will say that this is to be understood,* etc.

### TREATMENT OF THE QUESTIONS.

For the understanding of this part there arises here the question concerning the purgation of sins after this life. For the understanding of which three [things] are asked.

First it is asked concerning the purgation of sins before purgatory.

Second, concerning purgation through purgatory.

Third, concerning liberation from purgatory.

Concerning the first, since in what precedes[^1] it has been asked concerning justification from mortal [sins], it is asked here concerning the blotting-out of venial [sins]. Concerning which two [things] are asked.

First it is asked, whether venial [sins] can be blotted out without grace.

Second, whether they can be blotted out by grace without penance.

### ARTICLE I.

#### *On the purgation of venial sins in this life.*

### QUESTION I.

#### *Whether venial sins can be blotted out without grace.*

la: Dist. 17. p. 1. per totam.

en: Distinction 17, part 1, throughout.

translators_notes:
- **Provenance:** Latin re-set from IA djvu OCR raw lines 60251–60291 (COMMENTARIUS/Pars-I header through the QUAESTIO I title) with the PDF column bands authoritative in the two-column DIVISIO TEXTUS and TRACTATIO QUAESTIONUM regions. Offset pdf = printed + 20.
- **PAGE CORRECTION (was 545):** The auto-rechunk frontmatter declared `printed_pages: [545]`, but p.545 (running head "DIST. XXI. P. II.") is wholly the **d.21 Pars II littera Magistri** (Cap. VII–IX: *Quid sit generalis confessio* / *Quod nemo debet confiteri* / *De poena sacerdotis*). The COMMENTARIUS IN DISTINCTIONEM XXI / Pars I opens on **p.546** (running head "546 SENTENTIARUM LIB. IV.", verified in the raw OCR page marker at the head of the range and in the PDF bands). Frontmatter corrected to `printed_pages: [546]`, `pdf_pages: [566]`.
- **Structure confirmed:** Distinction XXI Pars I divides into three top-level questions (TRACTATIO QUAESTIONUM, p.546): (1) *de purgatione peccatorum ante purgatorium*; (2) *de purgatione per purgatorium*; (3) *de liberatione a purgatorio* — these correspond to the three articles De remissione venialium / De purgatorio / De liberatione a purgatorio. The first then subdivides (Circa primum) into two: q1 *utrum venialia possint deleri sine gratia*; q2 *utrum possint deleri a gratia sine poenitentia*. Per the divisio-chunk convention the ARTICULUS I opener (*De purgatione peccatorum venialium in hac vita*) folds in here, with the QUAESTIO I heading + title shown but the q1 *Fundamenta* body left to `d21-p1-a1-q1`.
- **Apparatus / footer ownership (cross-chunk hand-offs):**
  - The **p.545 footers** visible at the head of the raw range (note 1 *...quid. — Infra respicitur Ps. 18,13*; note 2 *Libr. V. Hypognost. (inter Augustini opera)...*; note 3 *Sermo 181. (alias 29. de Verbis Apost.)...*; and the right-column notes 4 *Ita in C. Sacerdos ante (2.)...* / 5 *XVII. Dist. c. 4. — Haec sumta sunt ex Gratian...*) all anchor in the **d.21 littera Magistri (Pars II, Cap. VII–IX)** and belong to those littera chunks, NOT to this divisio. Hand-off: claim when the d21 littera chunks are promoted.
  - On **p.546**, only footer **note 1** (*Dist. 17. p. 1. per totam.*) anchors in MY body — at the TRACTATIO marker *cum in praecedentibus¹ sit quaesitum* — so it is rendered here.
  - The remaining p.546 footers — note 2 (*Aliis verbis sic poni potest quaestio: utrum in statu peccati mortalis dimittatur veniale.*), note 3 (*Vat. cum paucis codd. ultra quam meruit ille. Inferius post punit ex cod. U supplevimus Deus.*), note 4 (*Cfr. supra pag. 292, nota 9.*) — anchor in the **QUAESTIO I Fundamenta** (`...deleri sine gratia²`; `severus est³ qui meruit`; `pronitatem ad bonum commutabile⁴`) and belong to **`d21-p1-a1-q1`**. Hand-off forwarded.
- **Hand-off to `d21-p1-a1-q1`:** the QUAESTIO I body begins on p.546 (*Et quod possint deleri sine gratia, videtur: 1. Quia omnis culpa remissa est omnino...*) right after the title shown here; p.546 footers 2–4 belong to that chunk.
- **Marginalia trimmed:** the Quaracchi outer-margin gloss *Ad oppositum* (p.546 left col, against the q1 Fundamenta) is editorial marginalia, not Bonaventure's text — excluded per the OCR-cleanup rule (and it sits in the next chunk's region in any case).
- **No `[?]` flags** — all body text read cleanly from the OCR and was confirmed against the PDF bands (OCR garbles silently corrected: *lemporis→temporis, oslendit→ostendit, scihcet→scilicet, intelhgentiam→intelligentiam, TRAGTATIO→TRACTATIO, hane→hanc*).
- No scholion in this divisio chunk.
</content>
</invoke>

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. 21, Part 2, Divisio Textus

title_alt:
Divisio textus
Division of the text

source_text:
<!-- page 560 -->

## Commentarius in Distinctionem XXI. — Pars II.

*De confessione sacramentali quoad utilitatem a parte finis.*

*Post haec considerandum est, utrum prosit confessio etc.*

TEXTUM MAGISTRI VIDE SUPRA PAG. 545.

### DIVISIO TEXTUS.

Supra egit Magister de confessionis necessitate a parte confitentis et potestate a parte absolventis et opportunitate a parte temporis; hic agit de utilitate a parte finis; et habet haec pars duas. In prima ostendit, quae confessio sit utilis, scilicet confessio vera et humilis. In secunda ostendit, quantum confessionis contemptus obsit, infra[^1]: *Cumque multis auctoritatibus supra sit assertum.*

Prima in duas dividitur. In prima ostendit, quae sunt attendenda in confessione ex parte confitentis. In secunda, ex parte audientis, ibi: *Caveat autem sacerdos* etc. Prima pars duas continet. In prima ostendit, quod confessio non debet esse diminuta. In secunda, quod non debet esse superflua, ibi: *Sicut autem poenitens celare non debet* etc. Similiter secunda, in qua determinat ex parte sacerdotis, quid observandum sit, duo continet. Primum est, ut pure teneat secretum[^2]. Secundum vero, ut non absolvat alterius parochianum, et hoc ibi tangitur: *Quod vero dictum est.* Et ita principaliter duo tanguntur, secundum quod confessio *integra* debet esse et *secreta.*

### TRACTATIO QUAESTIONUM.

Ad intelligentiam huius partis secundum duo, quae tanguntur in littera, duo principaliter quaeruntur.

Primo quaeritur de confessione quantum ad modum.

Secundo vero quaeritur de confessione quantum ad sigillum.

Circa primum quaeruntur tria.

Primo quaeritur, utrum liceat aliquod peccatum in confessione dimittere[^3].

Secundo, utrum liceat addere.

Tertio, utrum liceat aliena peccata referre.

english:
## Commentary on Distinction XXI — Part II.

*On sacramental confession with respect to its usefulness from the side of its end.*

*After these things it must be considered whether confession is profitable etc.*

FOR THE TEXT OF THE MASTER SEE ABOVE, PAGE 545.

### DIVISION OF THE TEXT.

Above, the Master treated of the necessity of confession from the side of the one confessing, and of the power from the side of the one absolving, and of the opportunity from the side of time; here he treats of its usefulness from the side of its end; and this part has two [sections]. In the first he shows what confession is useful, namely a true and humble confession. In the second he shows how much contempt of confession is harmful, below[^1]: *And since it has been asserted above by many authorities.*

The first is divided into two. In the first he shows what things are to be attended to in confession from the side of the one confessing. In the second, from the side of the one hearing, there: *But let the priest beware* etc. The first part contains two. In the first he shows that confession ought not to be diminished. In the second, that it ought not to be superfluous, there: *But just as the penitent ought not to conceal* etc. Likewise the second [part], in which he determines from the side of the priest what is to be observed, contains two. The first is that he keep the secret purely[^2]. The second indeed, that he not absolve another's parishioner, and this is touched on there: *But what has been said.* And so principally two things are touched on, according to which confession ought to be *whole* and *secret.*

### TREATMENT OF THE QUESTIONS.

For the understanding of this part, according to the two things which are touched on in the text, two [questions] are principally asked.

First it is asked concerning confession with respect to its manner.

Second indeed it is asked concerning confession with respect to the seal.

Concerning the first, three [questions] are asked.

First it is asked, whether it is permitted to omit some sin in confession[^3].

Second, whether it is permitted to add [to it].

Third, whether it is permitted to report another's sins.

la: Dist. XXII. — Codd. *ibi.*

en: Distinction XXII. — The codices read *ibi* ["there"].

la: Edd. *ut confessa teneat secrete.* Inferius pro *secretum* *quod* (codd. omittunt ibi *confessio*) edd. cum uno alteroque cod. *scilicet quod.*

en: The [printed] editions read *ut confessa teneat secrete* ["that he keep secret what has been confessed"]. Further below, for *secretum* ["the secret"], *quod* (the codices there omit *confessio*) the editions, with one or another codex, read *scilicet quod* ["namely that"].

la: Edd. hic et infra in ipsa quaestione *omittere.*

en: The [printed] editions, here and below in the question itself, read *omittere* ["to omit"].

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** Pars II COMMENTARIUS opener for Distinction XXI — *De confessione*. Latin re-set from IA djvu OCR (raw lines 61585–61624) cross-checked column-by-column against the p.560 PDF bands (`/tmp/colcrop/vol4-p560-{L,R}-{0,1,2}.png`); folio "560" and running head "SENTENTIARUM LIB. IV." confirmed on the right band; the header reads "COMMENTARIUS IN DISTINCTIONEM XXI. Pars II." Offset pdf = printed + 20. This chunk holds the Pars II DIVISIO TEXTUS + TRACTATIO QUAESTIONUM; ARTICULUS I / QUAESTIO I (*Utrum liceat aliquod peccatum in confessione omittere*) begin in the next chunk (p2-a1-q1), starting at the bottom of p.560 and running onto p.561.

**Page span.** This chunk is wholly on printed **p.560**. Note: p.559 (running head "DIST. XXI. P. I. DUBIA.") is the tail of the Pars I dubia (DUB. II–IV) and belongs to the prior d21-p1-dubia chunk, not here. p.561 (running head "DIST. XXI. P. II. ART. I. QUAEST...") already belongs to p2-a1-q1.

**Footer split (p.560).** The printed page carries five footers. By body anchor: notes ¹, ², ³ anchor inside this DIVISIO/TRACTATIO and are rendered above. Notes ⁴ (*Scilicet de Vera et falsa Poenitentia…*) and ⁵ (*Cod. aa ostendit*) anchor inside QUAESTIO I's arguments (1. *auctoritate Augustini…* / 2. *ratione ostenditur…*), which begin below the TRACTATIO at the bottom of p.560, and so are carried in the next chunk (p2-a1-q1). Cross-chunk hand-off **from** d21-p1-dubia: that chunk's dubia tail finished on p.559; no footers migrate forward into this divisio. Hand-off **to** p2-a1-q1: footers 4–5 of p.560 belong to it.

**Article/question listing (TRACTATIO, confirmed against PDF):**
- Two principal questions: (I) *De confessione quantum ad modum* — Article I; (II) *De confessione quantum ad sigillum* — Article II.
- Article I (ad modum) has three questions:
  1. utrum liceat aliquod peccatum in confessione omittere — whether it is permitted to omit some sin in confession.
  2. utrum liceat addere — whether it is permitted to add.
  3. utrum liceat aliena peccata referre — whether it is permitted to report another's sins.

**OCR corrections (silent):** `C0MMENTARIU8`→COMMENTARIUS, `DISTINGTIONEM`→DISTINCTIONEM, `fmis`→finis, `esl`→est, `ulrum`→utrum, `elc.`→etc., `conlinet`→continet, `oslendit`→ostendit, `dimi-nuta`→diminuta, `Simihter`→Similiter, `secimda`→secunda, `secandum`→secundum, `liltera`→littera, `quaerunlur`→quaeruntur, `Terlio`→Tertio, `hceat`→liceat, `ahena`→aliena, `parochianiim`→parochianum, `principahter`→principaliter, `swpra`→supra, `auctoritalibus`→auctoritatibus, `dividilur`→dividitur, `tiabet liaec`→habet haec, `qudad niodum`→quoad modum (article head, next chunk). PDF prints "PAG. 545" (cross-ref to the Master's text). The OCR's body word *dimittere* for note ³ is retained in the Latin body; the editions' variant *omittere* is recorded in the apparatus per the footer.

**[?] flags:** none.

**Apparatus anchoring fix (2026-07-13).** The three apparatus entries were unanchored — the Latin/English bodies carried literal unicode superscripts (¹²³) instead of Markdown `[^N]` footnote syntax, so `build-content.mjs` rendered the notes attached to nothing. Confirmed printed positions against the p.560 column bands (`/tmp/colcrop/vol4-p560-{L,R}-{0,1,2}.png`, L column top→bottom): [^1] after *infra* (L-0/L-1 seam, "...contemptus obsit, infra¹: Cumque..."); [^2] after *secretum* (L-1, "...ut pure teneat secretum²."); [^3] after *dimittere* (L-1, "...in confessione dimittere³."). No wording changed — only the superscript glyphs were converted to `[^N]` in both the Latin and English bodies, at the same lemma in each language. Verify script confirms defs==Latin anchors==English anchors, 3/3/3.


title: Dist. 21, Part 1, Art. 1, Q. 1

source_text:
<!-- page 546 -->

### Articulus I. *De purgatione peccatorum venialium in hac vita.*
### Quaestio I. *Utrum peccata venialia possint deleri sine gratia.*

Et quod possint deleri sine gratia[^2] videtur:

1. *Quia* omnis culpa remissa est omnino, cum quantum ipsa exigit[^1] est punita; sed venialis culpa est digna sola poena temporali: ergo cum omne temporale finem habeat, possibile est, aliquem existentem extra gratiam sufficienter pro illa culpa puniri: ergo possibile est sine gratia remitti. Prima propositio manifesta est, quia nullus ita severus est in iustitia, quod puniat ultra quod meruit[^3] qui peccavit: ergo cum sufficienter punit Deus, amplius non punit; sed non potest esse culpa sine poena: ergo cessante poena, cessat culpa.

2. Item, venialis culpa non dicit deformitatem imaginis, sed solum pronitatem ad bonum commutabile[^4]; sed pronitas potest sine gratia aboleri, quoniam qui est pronus ad avaritiam sine gratia potest fieri prodigus et pronus ad prodigalitatem: ergo etc.

3. Item, in morbis parvis natura non indiget medicina, sed solum quando morbus magnificatus est; sed venialia non prosternunt naturam, immo dimittunt eam in suo vigore: ergo praeter medicinam gratiae potest per naturam veniale curari.

<!-- page 547 -->

4. Item, quanto morbi minorem habent connexionem et similitudinem, tanto specialius potest unus sine alio curari; sed veniale maiorem convenientiam habet cum aliquo veniali quam cum mortali[^1b]; sed unum veniale potest deleri, alio remanente: ergo multo fortius potest deleri veniale, remanente mortali: ergo etc.

5. Item, si veniale non potest deleri sine gratia; esto quod aliquis in solo veniali moriatur, illud nunquam delebitur, sed quamdiu durabit, punietur: ergo aeternaliter ex se ipso punitur: ergo non differt a mortali.

**Contra:** 1. Augustinus, *de Civitate Dei* vigesimo primo[^2b]: «*Nec magna nec parva possunt nobis dimitti, nisi nos dimiserimus debitoribus nostris*»; hoc non est ob aliud, nisi quia, dum homo non dimittit, est semper in peccato: ergo nullum peccatum potest homini dimitti, quamdiu est in peccato mortali: ergo si sola gratia a peccato liberat, veniale non dimittitur sine gratia.

2. Item, si aliquid delet aliquid aliud, habet oppositionem ad illud aliquo modo; sed nec poena nec natura habet oppositionem ad culpam: ergo nec per poenam nec per[^3b] naturam delentur venialia, nisi adsit gratia.

3. Item, omne peccatum nocet et adimit, sicut vult Augustinus in *Enchiridio*[^4b] et multis locis: ergo veniale aliquid de bono spirituali et rectitudine adimit; sed solus Deus potest animae restituere bonum, sicut solus potuit eam creare, et hoc est per gratiam: ergo etc.

4. Item, Deus punit pro veniali, hoc constat: ergo aliquid invenit displicentiae in veniali; sed nihil omnino removet displicentiam Dei, nisi quod invenit placentiam et veniam; sed sola gratia gratum faciens est illa quae Deo placere facit[^5b]: ergo etc.

5. Item, perfectius est carere veniali quam mortali: ergo aeque nobilis doni sive aeque perfecti, vel magis perfecti actus est delere veniale quam delere mortale; sed mortale deleri non potest nisi a dono gratiae gratum facientis[^6b]: ergo etc.

> **Conclusio.** Peccata venialia sine gratia gratum faciente non delentur.

**Respondeo:** Dicendum, quod aliquorum positio fuit, quod venialia sine gratia gratum faciente deleri possunt per gratiam gratis datam. Et rationem huius ostendere voluerunt, pro eo videlicet, quod veniale peccatum non repugnat gratiae gratum facienti, sed gratis datae; nec offendit Maiestatem divinam, quia ibi non diligitur aliquid supra Deum, sed aliquantulum inordinate sub Deo. Et ideo, sicut mortale potest deleri per gratiam[^7b], quia ei repugnat, et quia gratia Deo offenso reconciliat, et quia Deum contemptum amare facit super omnia; sic veniale potest deleri per gratiam gratis datam, quae illam modicam inordinationem removet et illam occasionem minus amandi Deum ab ipsa anima tollit; nec oportet, ibi esse gratiam elevantem animam ad dilectionem Dei super omnia, quia per veniale nihil amatur supra Deum.

Sed haec positio, licet probabilis videatur, a veritate tamen deviat, si quis inspiciat. Omne enim peccatum, eo ipso quod peccatum est, aliquo modo animam foedat[^8b] et aliquo modo ipsam deordinat, et necesse est ex hoc, quod aliquo modo Deo displiceat. Quoniam igitur nota displicentiae minima, quae esse possit, sine habitu, qui reducit ad complacentiam et ad amicitiam, auferri non potest; tenendum omnino de omni peccato generaliter, est quod nullum omnino potest deleri sine gratia gratum faciente. Sic enim decrevit nos sanare divina misericordia; et hoc dicunt Sancti, et sonat Scriptura[^9b], quae maxime ponit, gratiam esse necessariam ad delenda peccata.

1. Ad illud ergo quod obiicitur, quod sufficiens punitio absolvit a culpa; dicendum, quod si illud intelligatur in facie hominum, qui iudicant secundum exteriora[^10b], potest habere veritatem. Sed in facie Dei, qui considerat faciem animae internam et decorem imaginis suae, quantacumque sit poena, non potest omnino absolvere peccatorem, nisi removeatur interior deformitas; et ideo in foro Dei impossibile est peccatum sufficienter puniri quantum ad tempus, nisi deleatur per gratiam.

2. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod veniale dicit solam pronitatem; dicendum, quod falsum est, immo amplius dicit quandam notam displicentiae; et ita semper manet in anima, etiam si veniat pronitas ad oppositum, nisi interveniat caritas, quae operit multitudinem peccatorum[^11b].

3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod in morbis parvis natura non indiget medicina; dicendum, quod verum est; et similiter in spiritualibus est, si recte fiat similitudinis translatio. Natura igitur habet in

<!-- page 548 -->

se *fundamentum* sanitatis, scilicet *virtutes naturales*, regentes complexionem et expellentes nociva; regimen autem *spiritualis sanitatis* non est nisi gratia *gratum faciens*: et ideo, sicut corrupta vi naturali, non potest deleri morbus *corporalis*; sic nec, absente gratia, potest deleri, quantumlibet sit parvus, morbus *spiritualis*. Non ergo gratia sicut *medicina*, sed sicut *regitiva virtus* est; exterius autem *Sacramentum* est sicut *medicina*, quo non indiget gratia necessario, expedit sibi tamen ad curationem venialis, maxime cum illa aegritudo est consuetudinaria.

4. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod maior connexio est venialis ad veniale; dicendum, quod veniale sine veniali potest deleri, quia neutrum fundamentum virtutis vivificantis et sanantis evertit, scilicet gratiam; sed *mortale* exstirpat gratiam; non enim simul stat cum vita. Et quoniam non potest deleri aliqua culpa sine gratia, ideo nullus morbus, etiam minimus, potest deleri, quin deleatur omnis mortalis culpa; non sic autem est in veniali, pro eo quod utrumque simul stat cum gratia.

5. Ad illud quod obiicitur de eo qui in solo veniali decedit; dicendum, quod positio est impossibilis; et ideo non est mirum, si accidat impossibile. Si tamen aliquis decedat cum *originali* et *veniali*, vel cum *veniali* et alio quocumque *mortali*; punietur pro veniali aliquanta poena intensive; sed ratione *adiuncti* poena illa erit aeterna, non ratione ipsius culpae venialis.

english:
### Article I. *On the purgation of venial sins in this life.*
### Question I. *Whether venial sins can be destroyed without grace.*

And that they can be destroyed without grace[^2] is seen:

1. *Because* every fault [that is] remitted is wholly punished, in proportion to what it itself demands[^1]; but a venial fault is worthy of temporal penalty alone: therefore, since everything temporal has an end, it is possible that someone existing outside grace be sufficiently punished for that fault: therefore it is possible that it be remitted without grace. The first proposition is manifest, because no one is so severe in justice that he should punish beyond what he who has sinned has deserved[^3]: therefore when God punishes sufficiently, he punishes no further; but a fault cannot exist without a penalty: therefore, the penalty ceasing, the fault ceases.

2. Likewise, a venial fault does not denote a deformity of the image, but only a proneness toward a changeable good[^4]; but a proneness can be abolished without grace, since one who is prone to avarice can without grace become prodigal and prone to prodigality: therefore etc.

3. Likewise, in small ailments nature does not need medicine, but only when the ailment has been magnified; but venial [sins] do not lay nature low, nay rather they leave it in its vigor: therefore, apart from the medicine of grace, a venial [sin] can be cured by nature.

4. Likewise, the less connection and likeness ailments have, the more specially can one be cured without the other; but a venial [sin] has greater agreement with another venial [sin] than with a mortal one[^1b]; but one venial [sin] can be destroyed while another remains: therefore much more strongly can a venial [sin] be destroyed while a mortal one remains: therefore etc.

5. Likewise, if a venial [sin] cannot be destroyed without grace; suppose that someone die in a venial [sin] alone, that [sin] will never be destroyed, but as long as it endures, it will be punished: therefore he is punished eternally by his very self: therefore it does not differ from a mortal [sin].

**On the contrary:** 1. Augustine, *On the City of God*, [book] twenty-one[^2b]: «*Neither great nor small [sins] can be remitted to us, unless we ourselves remit [them] to our debtors*»; this is for no other reason than that, while a man does not remit, he is always in sin: therefore no sin can be remitted to a man so long as he is in mortal sin: therefore if grace alone frees from sin, a venial [sin] is not remitted without grace.

2. Likewise, if something destroys something else, it has some opposition to it; but neither penalty nor nature has opposition to fault: therefore venial [sins] are destroyed neither by penalty nor by[^3b] nature, unless grace be present.

3. Likewise, every sin harms and takes away, as Augustine holds in the *Enchiridion*[^4b] and in many places: therefore a venial [sin] takes away something of spiritual good and of rectitude; but God alone can restore good to the soul, just as he alone could create it, and this is through grace: therefore etc.

4. Likewise, God punishes for a venial [sin], this is established: therefore he finds something of displeasure in a venial [sin]; but nothing whatever removes the displeasure of God, except that which finds favor and pardon; but grace making-pleasing alone is that which makes [one] pleasing to God[^5b]: therefore etc.

5. Likewise, it is more perfect to be free of a venial [sin] than of a mortal one: therefore it is the act of an equally noble gift, or of an equally perfect, or more perfect, [act] to destroy a venial [sin] than to destroy a mortal one; but a mortal [sin] cannot be destroyed except by the gift of grace making-pleasing[^6b]: therefore etc.

> **Conclusion.** Venial sins are not destroyed without grace making-pleasing.

**I respond:** It must be said that the position of some was that venial [sins] can be destroyed without grace making-pleasing, through gratuitously-given grace [*gratia gratis data*]. And they wished to show the reason for this, namely for this, that a venial sin does not conflict with grace making-pleasing, but [only] with gratuitously-given [grace]; nor does it offend the divine Majesty, because there nothing is loved above God, but [something is loved] somewhat inordinately under God. And therefore, just as a mortal [sin] can be destroyed by grace[^7b], because it conflicts with it, and because grace reconciles [the man] to the offended God, and because it makes [the man] love the contemned God above all things; so a venial [sin] can be destroyed by gratuitously-given grace, which removes that slight inordinateness and takes away from the soul itself that occasion of loving God less; nor is it necessary that there be there a grace elevating the soul to the love of God above all things, because through a venial [sin] nothing is loved above God.

But this position, although it seems probable, nevertheless deviates from the truth, if one examines it. For every sin, by the very fact that it is a sin, in some way defiles the soul[^8b] and in some way disorders it, and from this it is necessary that it in some way displease God. Since therefore the least mark of displeasure that can be cannot be taken away without a habit which leads back to complacency and to friendship; it is to be held altogether, concerning every sin generally, that nothing whatever can be destroyed without grace making-pleasing. For thus the divine mercy has decreed to heal us; and this the Saints say, and Scripture sounds forth[^9b], which especially posits that grace is necessary for the destroying of sins.

1. To that, then, which is objected, that sufficient punishment absolves from fault; it must be said that if that be understood in the face of men, who judge according to outward things[^10b], it can have truth. But in the face of God, who considers the inward face of the soul and the beauty of his own image, however great the penalty be, he cannot wholly absolve the sinner, unless the inner deformity be removed; and therefore in the court of God it is impossible for a sin to be sufficiently punished as to time, unless it be destroyed through grace.

2. To that which is objected, that a venial [sin] denotes only a proneness; it must be said that it is false, nay rather it denotes besides a certain mark of displeasure; and so it always remains in the soul, even if a proneness to the opposite should come, unless charity intervene, which covers a multitude of sins[^11b].

3. To that which is objected, that in small ailments nature does not need medicine; it must be said that it is true; and likewise it is so in spiritual things, if the transfer of the likeness be rightly made. Nature therefore has in

itself a *foundation* of health, namely the *natural virtues*, governing the complexion and expelling harmful things; but the governance of *spiritual health* is nothing but grace *making-pleasing*: and therefore, just as, the natural power being corrupted, a *bodily* ailment cannot be destroyed; so neither, grace being absent, can a *spiritual* ailment be destroyed, however small it be. Therefore grace [acts] not as *medicine*, but as a *governing virtue*; but outwardly the *Sacrament* is as *medicine*, of which grace does not necessarily have need, yet it is expedient for it for the curing of a venial [sin], especially when that sickness is habitual.

4. To that which is objected, that there is greater connection of a venial [sin] to a venial [sin]; it must be said that a venial [sin] can be destroyed without [another] venial [sin], because neither overturns the foundation of the life-giving and healing virtue, namely grace; but a *mortal* [sin] uproots grace; for it does not stand together with life. And since no fault can be destroyed without grace, therefore no ailment, even the smallest, can be destroyed without every mortal fault being destroyed; but it is not so in a venial [sin], for this [reason], that each stands together with grace.

5. To that which is objected concerning one who departs in a venial [sin] alone; it must be said that the position is impossible; and therefore it is no wonder if the impossible follows. If, however, someone should depart with an *original* and a *venial* [sin], or with a *venial* [sin] and any other *mortal* one; he will be punished for the venial [sin] with a certain penalty intensively; but by reason of the *adjunct* that penalty will be eternal, not by reason of the venial fault itself.

la: Dist. 17. p. I. per totam.

en: Distinction 17, p. I, throughout.

la: Aliis verbis sic poni potest quaestio: utrum in statu peccati mortalis dimittatur veniale.

en: In other words the question can be put thus: whether in the state of mortal sin a venial [sin] is remitted.

la: Vat. cum paucis codd. *ultra quam meruit ille.* Inferius post *punit* ex cod. U supplevimus *Deus.*

en: The Vatican edition with a few codices [reads] *beyond what that one deserved.* Below, after *punishes*, from codex U we have supplied *God.*

la: Cfr. supra pag. 292, nota 9.

en: Cf. above p. 292, note 9.

la: Vide supra d. 16. p. II. a. 3. q. I.

en: See above d. 16. p. II. a. 3. q. I.

la: Cap. 27. n. 4. Respicitur Matth. 6, 12. — Circa finem arg. post *a peccato* in codd. bene O R S T additur *mortali.*

en: Chapter 27, n. 4. Reference is made to Matthew 6:12. — Near the end of the argument, after *from sin*, in codices clearly O R S T is added *mortal.*

la: Cum codd. I K L X bis substituimus *per* pro *propter.*

en: With codices I K L X we have twice substituted *per* [by] for *propter* [on account of].

la: Cap. 12. n. 4. et c. 17. n. 5. Cfr. III. *de Lib. Arb.* c. 13. n. 36. Vide etiam tom. II. pag. 822, nota 1, ubi alios locc. allegavimus. — Mox post *et multis* cod. U addit *aliis.*

en: Chapter 12, n. 4, and c. 17, n. 5. Cf. III *On Free Choice*, c. 13, n. 36. See also tom. II, p. 822, note 1, where we have cited other passages. — Soon, after *and many*, codex U adds *other.*

la: Ut ostensum est II. Sent. d. 29. a. 1. q. 1.

en: As was shown in II Sent. d. 29. a. 1. q. 1.

la: Cfr. supra d. 17. p. I. a. 1. q. 1.

la: Codd. R S T bene supplent *gratum facientem.*

en: Codices R S T clearly supply *making-pleasing.*

la: Plures codd. et edd. *defoedat,* cod. A *deformat.*

en: Several codices and editions [read] *defiles thoroughly,* codex A *deforms.*

la: Cfr. Rom. 3, 24. seqq.; 5, 15. seqq.; Eph. 2, 5. seqq.; Tit. 3, 7. Ambros., *Epist.* 26. n. 7, docet, gratiam abolere peccatum. August., *de Spiritu et lit.* c. 30. n. 52: *Per gratiam sanatio animae a vitio peccati.* Vide etiam II. Sent. d. 26. q. 2. et d. 28. a. 1. q. I. — Pro *sanare* cod. H *salvare.*

en: Cf. Rom. 3:24 ff.; 5:15 ff.; Eph. 2:5 ff.; Tit. 3:7. Ambrose, *Letter* 26, n. 7, teaches that grace abolishes sin. Augustine, *On the Spirit and the Letter*, c. 30, n. 52: *Through grace [comes] the healing of the soul from the vice of sin.* See also II Sent. d. 26. q. 2. and d. 28. a. 1. q. I. — For *to heal* codex H [reads] *to save.*

la: Libr. I. Reg. 16, 7: *Homo enim videt ea quae parent, Dominus autem intuetur cor.* — Mox post *Sed* cod. H addit *si.*

en: 1 Kings [1 Samuel] 16:7: *For man sees the things that appear, but the Lord beholds the heart.* — Soon, after *But*, codex H adds *if.*

la: Epist. I. Petr. 4, 8: *Quia caritas operit* etc. Cfr. Prov. 10, 12.

en: 1 Peter 4:8: *Because charity covers* etc. Cf. Prov. 10:12. ---

latin_scholion:
**I.** De purgatorio vide supra d. 20. p. I. per totam et hic dub. 1–3, ubi locus Apostoli (I. Cor. 3, 12.) exponitur (cfr. etiam infra d. 23. a. 1. q. 1. de remissione venialium per extremam unctionem). — Quaestio 1. intelligitur de habitu sive statu gratiae et influxu eius, ut est «regitiva virtus» (ad 3.), non de nova infusione gratiae habitualis, ut docet etiam S. Thom. locc. infra citt. — De I. quaestione: Alex. Hal., S. p. IV. q. 15. m. 3. a. 4. § 1. — Scot., hic q. 1. n. 1. — S. Thom., supra d. 16. q. 2. a. 2. quaestiunc. 1; S. III. q. 87. a. 2; de Malo q. 7. a. 12. — Petr. a Tar., supra d. 16. a. 7. quaestiunc. 1. 3. — Richard. a Med., supra d. 16. a. 3. q. 2. ad 2. — Durand., supra d. 16. q. 2. — Dionys. Carth., de tota hac p. I. hic q. 1.

**II.** Quoad seq. (2.) quaestionem Alex. Hal., (loc. cit. § 2.) resolvit: «Dico ergo sine praeiudicio, quod sine motu voluntatis actuali, vel habituali [i. e. virtuali] nolentis peccasse venialiter non deletur veniale». Hoc autem ita explicat, ut asserat: «Non video, quomodo liberum arbitrium possit consentire gratiae delenti peccatum, nisi dissentiat ipsi sive nolit fecisse, sive in particulari... sive in generali dissentiat, sive nolit actu vel habitu, dico». Ratione huius principii idem (loc. cit. in fine) etiam opinatus est, venialia fieri mortalia in casu, si quis moriens et sui compos non *dissentiendo* poenitentiam egerit de istis venialibus. — Communis quidem sententia ad veniam horum peccatorum impetrandam requiri et sufficere docet *virtualem displicentiam*; sed simul asserit, hanc importari etiam in actibus aliarum virtutum, non tantum poenitentiae sive contritionis (cfr. S. Thom., hic q. 2. a. 1; S. III. q. 87. a. 2.). Simul communius docetur, etiam post mortem animas in gratia decedentes vi eiusdem et poenarum purgari posse a culpa venialium (cfr. infra a. 2. q. 1.). — A doctrina valde communi, quod venialia peccata in damnatis habeant poenam aeternam per accidens (q. 1. ad 5. tacta), dissentit Scot. (hic q. 1. n. 8.) cum suis, Nominalibus nonnullisque aliis et docet, poenam aeternam venialibus deberi nec per se nec per accidens. De hac quaestione cfr. S. Thom., hic q. 1. a. 2. quaestiunc. 3; B. Albert., hic a. 8; Petr. a Tar., hic q. 2. a. 2. quaestiunc. 2; Richard. a Med., hic a. 2. q. 3; Durand., hic q. 2. — De 2. quaestione praeter laudatos: Scot., loc. cit. n. 8. — Petr. a Tar., loc. cit. quaestiunc. 2. 4. — Richard. a Med., loc. cit. q. 1.

---

english_scholion:
**I.** On purgatory see above d. 20. p. I. throughout, and here dub. 1–3, where the passage of the Apostle (1 Cor. 3:12) is expounded (cf. also below d. 23. a. 1. q. 1. on the remission of venial [sins] through extreme unction). — Question 1 is understood concerning the habit or state of grace and its influx, as it is a «governing virtue» (at [reply] 3.), not concerning a new infusion of habitual grace, as St. Thomas too teaches in the places cited below. — On Question I: Alexander of Hales, S. p. IV. q. 15. m. 3. a. 4. § 1. — Scotus, here q. 1. n. 1. — St. Thomas, above d. 16. q. 2. a. 2. quaestiuncula 1; S. III. q. 87. a. 2; *de Malo* q. 7. a. 12. — Peter of Tarentaise, above d. 16. a. 7. quaestiuncula 1. 3. — Richard of Mediavilla, above d. 16. a. 3. q. 2. ad 2. — Durandus, above d. 16. q. 2. — Dionysius the Carthusian, on this whole p. I., here q. 1.

**II.** As to the following (2nd) question, Alexander of Hales (in the place cited, § 2.) resolves: «I say therefore without prejudice, that without a movement of the will, actual or habitual [i.e. virtual], unwilling to have sinned venially, a venial [sin] is not destroyed». And this he explains thus, so as to assert: «I do not see how free choice can consent to grace destroying a sin, unless it dissent from it or be unwilling to have done it, whether in particular... whether it dissent in general, whether it be unwilling in act or in habit, I say». By reason of this principle the same [author] (in the place cited, at the end) also was of the opinion that venial [sins] become mortal in the case where someone dying and in possession of himself should, by not *dissenting*, do penance for those venial [sins]. — The common opinion indeed teaches that for obtaining the pardon of these sins a *virtual displeasure* is required and suffices; but it asserts at the same time that this is implied also in the acts of other virtues, not only of penance or contrition (cf. St. Thomas, here q. 2. a. 1; S. III. q. 87. a. 2.). At the same time it is more commonly taught that even after death souls departing in grace can, by the power of the same [grace] and of penalties, be purged from the fault of venial [sins] (cf. below a. 2. q. 1.). — From the very common doctrine that venial sins in the damned have an eternal penalty per accidens (touched on at q. 1. ad 5.), Scotus dissents (here q. 1. n. 8.) with his [followers], the Nominalists, and some others, and teaches that an eternal penalty is owed to venial [sins] neither per se nor per accidens. On this question cf. St. Thomas, here q. 1. a. 2. quaestiuncula 3; Bl. Albert, here a. 8; Peter of Tarentaise, here q. 2. a. 2. quaestiuncula 2; Richard of Mediavilla, here a. 2. q. 3; Durandus, here q. 2. — On the 2nd question, besides those praised: Scotus, in the place cited, n. 8. — Peter of Tarentaise, in the place cited, quaestiuncula 2. 4. — Richard of Mediavilla, in the place cited, q. 1.

---

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** Latin re-set column-by-column from the PDF column bands (`/tmp/colcrop/vol4-p{546,547,548}-{L,R}-{0,1,2}.png`), with the IA djvu OCR (raw lines 60292–60490) 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/scholion/footer regions. Offset pdf = printed + 20.

**Page-verify (TASK CORRECTION).** The task spec named printed pages 545–547 → bands `vol4-p545/546/547`. Page-verify proved the chunk actually spans **546–548, not 545–547**: the `p545` band is entirely *Pars II* littera (running head "DIST. XXI. P. II.", Caps. VII/VIII *Quid sit generalis confessio*) and belongs to a later chunk, NOT this q1. The QUAESTIO I material begins low in the right column of printed **546** ("Et quod possint deleri sine gratia... 1. Quia omnis culpa..."), after the COMMENTARIUS IN DISTINCTIONEM XXI / Pars I / DIVISIO TEXTUS / TRACTATIO QUAESTIONUM (which belong to the d.21-p1-divisio chunk). Running heads confirmed: p546 top "546 ... SENT[ENTIARUM]"; p547 "DIST. XXI. P. I. ART. I. QUAEST. I. 547"; p548 "548 SENTENTIARUM LIB. IV." — distinction correct throughout. `printed_pages`/`pdf_pages` set to 546–548 / 566–568.

**Opener alignment confirmed.** q1 body opens "Et quod possint deleri sine gratia, videtur" under "ARTICULUS I. — De purgatione peccatorum venialium in hac vita. — QUAESTIO I. — Utrum peccata venialia possint deleri sine gratia", matching the title. The TRACTATIO lists "Primo quaeritur, utrum venialia possint deleri sine gratia" (= this q1) and "Secundo, utrum possint deleri a gratia sine poenitentia" (= sibling q2).

**Page-split map.**
- p. 546: ARTICULUS I / QUAESTIO I headers; q1 opener + arg 1 (L col bottom), args 2–3 (R col). (The COMMENTARIUS/DIVISIO/TRACTATIO above belong to the divisio chunk.)
- p. 546 → 547 boundary falls between arg 3 and arg 4. Page break placed there.
- p. 547: args 4–5; *Contra* 1–5; CONCLUSIO; RESPONDEO (the *probabilis positio* + its refutation); *Solutio oppositorum* replies 1–2 and the start of reply 3 ("...si recte fiat similitudinis translatio. Natura igitur habet in").
- p. 547 → 548 boundary falls inside reply 3 ("...habet in | se fundamentum sanitatis"). Page break placed there.
- p. 548: reply 3 tail (regitiva virtus / Sacramentum); replies 4–5; then the SCHOLION (§I–§II), fully contained on p.548 (L col §I + §II start, R col §II tail + the *De 2. quaestione* list). QUAESTIO II begins on p.548 immediately after the scholion (folded by the a1-q2 chunk, raw 60490+).

**Footer-ownership (apparatus, 15 entries, all anchored in this q1's body).**
- p. 546 (4 footers): `^1` Dist.17 (arg 1); `^2` "Aliis verbis..." question-restatement (opener); `^3` Vat. *ultra quam meruit ille* + cod. U *Deus* (arg 1); `^4` Cfr. pag.292 nota 9 (arg 2). (p.546's notes 1–2 in the print also serve the divisio TRACTATIO above — here only the q1-anchored markers are rendered.)
- p. 547 (11 footers, rendered as `^1b`–`^11b`): `^1b` d.16 p.II (arg 4); `^2b` *de Civ. Dei* 21 + cod. var. (Contra 1); `^3b` *per* pro *propter* (Contra 2); `^4b` *Enchirid.* + *de Lib. Arb.* + cod. U var. (Contra 3); `^5b` II Sent. d.29 (Contra 4); `^6b` d.17 p.I (Contra 5); `^7b` codd. RST *gratum facientem* (Respondeo); `^8b` *defoedat/deformat* var. (Respondeo refutation); `^9b` Rom./Eph./Tit. + Ambros./August. (Respondeo); `^10b` 1 Sam. 16,7 + cod. H var. (reply 1); `^11b` 1 Pet. 4,8 + Prov. (reply 2).
- p. 548 footers (notes 1–4 in print: *De purgatorio...*, *Vide supra pag.84...*, *Hic c.5*, *Libr. X c.29...*) all anchor in **QUAESTIO II's** body (which opens on p.548 after the scholion) — they migrate to the a1-q2 chunk, NOT here. The SCHOLION carries all its citations inline (no footnote markers).

**Scholion disposition (TASK FINDING).** `has_scholion: true`. The **Articulus I scholion** is a single block printed on p.548 immediately after q1's body, within this q1's printed pages, so it is **rendered IN FULL here (body first, scholion last)**. It has only **§I and §II**, and **covers Quaestiones 1–2 of the article**: §I → q1 (the q1 doctor-list + the "regitiva virtus / habitus sive status gratiae" clarification); §II → q2 ("Quoad seq. (2.) quaestionem..." — Alexander of Hales's resolution + the *virtualis displicentia* common opinion + the q2 doctor-list). The sibling **q2 (a1-q2) points here** for the article scholion rather than re-rendering it.

**Cross-chunk hand-offs.**
- **From the divisio chunk (before):** the d.21-p1-divisio chunk (raw above L60292: COMMENTARIUS IN DISTINCTIONEM XXI / Pars I / DIVISIO TEXTUS / TRACTATIO QUAESTIONUM + the ARTICULUS I opener) owns everything on pp.546–547 above "QUAESTIO I.", including the two-question TRACTATIO list and p.546 footer notes 1–2 insofar as they serve the divisio.
- **To q2 (a1-q2, raw 60490+):** q2 ("Utrum peccata venialia possint deleri a gratia sine contritione sive interiore poena") opens on p.548 in both columns **after** this scholion and runs onto p.549; it opens its own per-page footer sequence — p.548 footers 1–4 (and onward) all belong to q2. No footer migrates from this q1 to q2. q2 must reference **THIS chunk's `### Scholion`** (§II "Quoad seq. (2.) quaestionem" addresses q2) and render none of its own.

**[?] flags.** None unresolved. Notable silent OCR corrections from the PDF bands: arg 1 *quantum ipsa exigit est punita* / *ultra quod meruit qui peccavit* (OCR scattered); Respondeo *gratia gratis data* vs *gratum faciens* distinction (OCR `gratiim faciente`); refutation *animam foedat* (OCR `foedat^`, footer `defoedat`); reply 3 *regitiva virtus / Sacramentum sicut medicina* (OCR `regitiva virlus`, `Sacramentnm`); reply 5 *ratione adiuncti poena illa erit aeterna* (OCR `adiuncti`). The marginal rubrics in the columns (*Ad oppositum.*, *Contra.*, *Conclusio.*, *Notandum.*, *Solutio oppositorum.*, *Opinio 2. et conclusio.*, *Non probatur.*, *Fundamenta.*) are editorial side-glosses, omitted from the body per corpus convention.