title: Dist. 45, Art. 3, Q. 1

title_alt:
Utrum Sancti orent pro nobis
Whether the Saints pray for us

source_text:
<!-- page 947 -->

> **Nota de apparatu.** Quaracchi restarts its footnote numbering on every printed page. This chunk spans pp. 947–949, so its notes are page-qualified: notes 7–8 of page 947, notes 1–11 of page 948, and notes 1–2 of page 949. Notes 1–6 of page 947 belong to the preceding question (art. II, q. 3); notes 3–6 of page 949 belong to the following question (art. III, q. 2).

### Articulus III. *De suffragiis, quae Sancti impendunt vivis.*

Consequenter quantum ad tertium articulum quaeritur de suffragiis, quae impenduntur vivis a Sanctis sive a defunctis. Et circa hoc quaeruntur tria.

Primo quaeritur, utrum Sancti orent pro nobis.

Secundo, utrum Sancti impetrent nobis aliquid suis orationibus.

Tertio, utrum sit nobis utile rogare Sanctos.

### Quaestio I. *Utrum Sancti orent pro nobis.*

Quantum ergo ad primum ostenditur, quod Sancti orent pro nobis:

1. Quia dicitur de Christo, qui est Sanctus Sanctorum, ad Hebraeos septimo[^p947-7]: *Semper vivens ad interpellandum pro nobis*; sed Sancti sunt eius imitatores: ergo sicut Christus orat, et Sancti orant.

2. Item, hoc ipsum probatur per illud quod dicitur Ioannis decimo quarto[^p947-8]: *Ego rogabo Patrem, et alium Paraclitum dabit vobis*; ergo similiter Sancti orant.

<!-- page 948 -->

3. Item, Ecclesia communiter orat[^p948-1]: « Sancta Maria, ora pro nobis », ergo etc.: ergo si non stulte petit, patet etc.

4. Item, ratione videtur: quia Sancti diligunt nos ex caritate, ergo optant et desiderant salutem nostram; sed constat, quod sciunt, illam non posse esse nisi a Deo, ergo optant illam per Deum: ergo cum desiderium alicuius rei a Deo sit oratio[^p948-2], patet etc.

**Contra:**

1. Sancti volunt nobis salutem vel aliud bonum, aut non volunt. Si nolunt: ergo non orant; si volunt; sed dicit Anselmus in *Proslogio*[^p948-3] quod « Beati erunt omnipotentes suae voluntatis, sicut et Deus suae »: ergo cum « nullus oret quod potest per se », sicut dicit Augustinus *de Correctione et gratia*; si Sancti possunt, salutem nostram non orant, vel non sunt omnipotentes, si non possunt.

2. Item, ut dicit Damascenus[^p948-4], « oratio est ascensus intellectus in Deum »; sed Beati sunt in termino suae contemplationis: ergo eorum intellectus in Deum non ascendit, ergo non orant.

3. Item, beatus est cui ad votum cuncta succedunt; unde Augustinus decimo tertio *de Trinitate*[^p948-5] dicit, quod « Beatus habet quidquid vult »; sed nullus, habens quidquid vult, aliquid orat vel petit: ergo Sancti in patria non orant pro nobis.

Item, si Christus orat pro nobis, quaeritur quare non dicitur in Litania: *Christe, ora pro nobis*? Ergo si non dicitur, videtur, quod non oret pro nobis, ac per hoc nec Sancti.

Item, quaeritur: quare non dirigitur ad Spiritum sanctum oratio, sicut ad Patrem et Filium[^p948-6]?

> **Conclusio.** Sancti in caelo pro nobis orant.

**Respondeo:** Dicendum, quod, sicut dicit Magister in littera[^p948-7], « Sancti pro nobis orant ». — Et huius ratio est duplex: una est, quia vident nostram necessitatem, qua nos indigemus ab aliis relevari; alia propter Dei voluntatem, quia vult, ut unum membrum aliud relevet, et quod pro invicem sollicita sint membra[^p948-8]; unde cum ipsi sint liberati, debent alios adiuvare.

*Ad 1.* Ad illud ergo quod obiicitur, quod possunt quidquid volunt; dicendum, quod voluntas dupliciter comparatur ad actum: aut ad actum proprium, ut volo hoc facere; aut ad actum alienum, ut volo, quod alius faciat hoc, scilicet Deus vel homo. Unde dico, quod auctoritas Anselmi est respectu actus proprii, sed oratio vel petitio salutis respectu actus divini, ut scilicet Deus salvet.

*Ad 2.* Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod non ascendit intellectus in Deum; dicendum, quod intellectus dicitur in Deum ascendere tripliciter: aut per novum aspectum in Deum, scilicet quando homo revocat cogitationem ab aliis et convertit in Deum; et sic est tantum in viatoribus. — Alio modo, per aspectum alterius inferioris rei, ut cum quis cogitat humanam miseriam et implorat misericordiam, ut relevet miseriam; ibi dicitur aspectus, non quia de novo aspiciat, sed quia aliud inferius ad illud respiciat; et sic est in Beatis, quando pro nobis rogant, quia tunc nostram indigentiam considerant. — Tertio modo, propter continuationem intuitus primi; unde cum quis considerat Deum, qui est super se, et continue considerat, continue ascendit, non quia ad aliud et ad aliud, sed quia super se fertur; et hoc modo continue est in Beatis. Et sic patet istud, quia, si primo modo dicatur oratio, ascensus est tantum viae, secundo modo est viae et patriae, tertio modo tantum patriae[^p948-9].

*Ad 3.* Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod Beatus habet quidquid vult; dicendum, quod Beatus aliqua vult sibi, aliqua vult aliis. Dico ergo, quod ad substantiam[^p948-10] beatitudinis est, ut habeat omne quod vult sibi; sed ut habeat omne quod vult aliis, non est de substantia beatitudinis, sed de consummatione et bene esse; et hoc non erit, quousque omnes electi sint glorificati. Tunc enim quilibet habebit quod vult sibi et quod vult cuilibet alii; et tunc plena est beatitudo. Unde[^p948-11] *Beati orant tantum pro aliis, miseri pro se et pro aliis; sed consummato numero electorum, non rogabunt pro se nec pro aliis*.

<!-- page 949 -->

*Ad quaestionem incidentem 1.* Ad illud quod ultimo quaeritur de Christo, dicendum, quod propter errorem Arii vitandum[^p949-1], ne videamur Christum credere creaturam; et ne videamur eius potestatem minuere, qua potest omnia, eius petimus *miserationem*, non *orationem*.

*Ad quaestionem incidentem 2.* Quod vero quaeritur de Spiritu sancto, dicendum est, quod quia est donum, in quo omnia dona donantur[^p949-2], ideo petendus est ipse, non porrigenda est ei petitio.

english:
### Article III. *On the suffrages which the Saints bestow upon the living.*

Next, as to the third article, inquiry is made concerning the suffrages which are bestowed upon the living by the Saints or by the departed. And concerning this three things are asked.

First it is asked, whether the Saints pray for us.

Second, whether the Saints obtain anything for us by their prayers.

Third, whether it is useful for us to ask the Saints.

### Question I. *Whether the Saints pray for us.*

As to the first, then, it is shown that the Saints do pray for us:

1. Because it is said of Christ, who is the Holy of Holies, in Hebrews the seventh[^p947-7]: *Always living to make intercession for us*; but the Saints are his imitators: therefore as Christ prays, the Saints also pray.

2. Again, this same thing is proved by that which is said in John the fourteenth[^p947-8]: *I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Paraclete*; therefore in like manner the Saints pray.

3. Again, the Church commonly prays[^p948-1]: "Holy Mary, pray for us," therefore etc.: therefore if she does not ask foolishly, the point is clear, etc.

4. Again, it seems so by reason: because the Saints love us out of charity, therefore they choose and desire our salvation; but it is agreed that they know that salvation cannot be except from God, therefore they choose it through God: therefore since the desire of anything from God is prayer[^p948-2], the point is clear, etc.

**On the contrary:**

1. The Saints either will for us salvation or some other good, or they do not will it. If they do not will it, then they do not pray; if they do will it — but Anselm says in the *Proslogion*[^p948-3] that "the Blessed will be omnipotent over their own will, as God is over his": therefore since "no one prays for what he can do of himself," as Augustine says in *On Correction and Grace*; if the Saints are able, they do not pray for our salvation, or else they are not omnipotent, if they are not able.

2. Again, as the Damascene says[^p948-4], "prayer is the ascent of the intellect into God"; but the Blessed are at the term of their contemplation: therefore their intellect does not ascend into God, therefore they do not pray.

3. Again, he is blessed for whom all things turn out according to his wish; whence Augustine in the thirteenth book *On the Trinity*[^p948-5] says that "the Blessed man has whatever he wills"; but no one who has whatever he wills prays or asks for anything: therefore the Saints in the fatherland do not pray for us.

Again, if Christ prays for us, it is asked why it is not said in the Litany: *Christ, pray for us*? Therefore if it is not said, it seems that he does not pray for us, and by this neither do the Saints.

Again, it is asked: why is prayer not directed to the Holy Spirit, as it is to the Father and the Son[^p948-6]?

> **Conclusion.** The Saints in heaven pray for us.

**I answer:** It must be said that, as the Master says in the text[^p948-7], "the Saints pray for us." — And the ground of this is twofold: one is that they see our need, by which we require to be relieved by others; the other is on account of God's will, because he wills that one member should relieve another, and that the members should be solicitous for one another[^p948-8]; whence, since they themselves have been set free, they ought to help others.

*To 1.* To that, then, which is objected, that they can do whatever they will: it must be said that the will is compared to an act in two ways: either to its own act, as "I will to do this"; or to another's act, as "I will that another do this," namely God or man. Whence I say that Anselm's authority is with respect to one's own act, but prayer or the petition for salvation is with respect to the divine act, namely that God should save.

*To 2.* To that which is objected, that the intellect does not ascend into God: it must be said that the intellect is said to ascend into God in three ways: either by a new regard toward God, namely when a man recalls his thought from other things and turns it toward God; and thus it is only in wayfarers. — In another way, by the regard of some lower thing, as when someone considers human misery and implores mercy, that it may relieve the misery; there it is called a regard, not because he looks anew, but because something lower looks toward that; and thus it is in the Blessed, when they ask on our behalf, because then they consider our indigence. — In a third way, on account of the continuation of the first gaze; whence when someone considers God, who is above him, and considers him continuously, he continuously ascends, not because he passes to one thing and another, but because he is borne above himself; and in this way it is continuously in the Blessed. And thus this is clear, because, if prayer is spoken of in the first way, the ascent belongs only to the way; in the second way it belongs to the way and to the fatherland; in the third way only to the fatherland[^p948-9].

*To 3.* To that which is objected, that the Blessed man has whatever he wills: it must be said that the Blessed man wills some things for himself, some things for others. I say therefore that it belongs to the substance[^p948-10] of beatitude that he should have everything he wills for himself; but that he should have everything he wills for others does not belong to the substance of beatitude, but to its consummation and well-being; and this will not be until all the elect are glorified. For then each will have what he wills for himself and what he wills for every other; and then beatitude is full. Whence[^p948-11] *the Blessed pray only for others, the wretched for themselves and for others; but when the number of the elect has been consummated, they will ask neither for themselves nor for others*.

*To the first incidental question.* To that which is asked last concerning Christ, it must be said that it is for the sake of avoiding the error of Arius[^p949-1], lest we should seem to believe Christ a creature; and lest we should seem to diminish his power, by which he can do all things, we ask of him his *compassion*, not his *prayer*.

*To the second incidental question.* But as to what is asked concerning the Holy Spirit, it must be said that, because he is the Gift in whom all gifts are given[^p949-2], therefore he himself is to be asked for, and a petition is not to be offered to him.

la: Vers. 25.

en: Verse 25.

la: Vers. 16. — In fine arg. cod. F addit *pro nobis*.

en: Verse 16. — At the end of the argument cod. F adds *pro nobis*.

la: In salutatione angelica et in Litaniis lauretanis.

en: In the angelic salutation and in the Litany of Loreto.

la: Vide supra pag. 368, nota 3. — Pro *prima* conclusione notentur verba Aristot., II. Rhetor. c. 5. (c. 4.): *Est igitur amare velle alicui bona evenire... et quantum in eo est, efficere, ut illa veniant.* — Post *desiderium* codd. G L N Y Z aa (E bb a secunda manu) addunt *vehemens*.

en: See above, p. 368, note 3. — For the *first* conclusion note the words of Aristotle, *Rhetoric* II, c. 5 (c. 4): *To love, then, is to will that goods befall someone... and, so far as lies in one, to bring it about that they come.* — After *desiderium* codd. G L N Y Z aa (E bb by a second hand) add *vehemens*.

la: Cap. 25. — Seq. sententia August. habetur in eius libro *de Natura et gratia*, c. 18. n. 20. Cfr. tom. III. pag. 371, nota 3.

en: Chapter 25. — The following statement of Augustine is found in his book *On Nature and Grace*, c. 18, n. 20. Cf. vol. III, p. 371, note 3.

la: Libr. III. *de Fide orthod.* c. 24. Vide supra pag. 368, nota 3.

en: Book III, *On the Orthodox Faith*, c. 24. See above, p. 368, note 3.

la: Cap. 5. n. 8: *Omnes autem beati habent quod volunt, quamvis non omnes qui habent quod volunt, continuo sint beati; continuo autem miseri qui vel non habent quod volunt, vel id habent quod non recte volunt. Beatus igitur non est, nisi qui et habet omnia quae vult, et nihil vult male.*

en: Chapter 5, n. 8: *All the blessed, however, have what they will, although not all who have what they will are forthwith blessed; but they are forthwith wretched who either do not have what they will, or have that which they do not rightly will. He therefore is not blessed except the one who both has all that he wills and wills nothing badly.*

la: In pluribus codd. et edd. desideratur *et Filium*.

en: In several codices and editions *et Filium* is wanting.

la: Hic c. 6. — Inferius pro *qua nos*, quod habent codd. G M O S X aa (bb a secunda manu), alii et edd. *quia nos*, et pro *ab aliis* codd. G L aa *ab eis*, Vat. *ab illis*.

en: Here c. 6. — Below, for *qua nos*, which codd. G M O S X aa (bb by a second hand) have, others and the editions read *quia nos*; and for *ab aliis* codd. G L aa read *ab eis*, the Vatican *ab illis*.

la: Epist. I. Cor. 12, 25. — Mox post *ipsi sint* cod. X addit *membra et sint*.

en: First Epistle to the Corinthians 12:25. — Just after *ipsi sint* cod. X adds *membra et sint*.

la: Cfr. III. Sent. d. 17. a. 2. q. 1. ad 3. — Superius pro *unde cum* codd. G L bb *ut cum*.

en: Cf. III *Sentences*, d. 17, a. 2, q. 1, ad 3. — Above, for *unde cum* codd. G L bb read *ut cum*.

la: Codd. E F *de substantia*.

en: Codd. E F read *de substantia*.

la: Ita codd. E G L aa bb, codd. I K *Beati ergo*, alii codd. et edd. *Item Beati*. Pro *plena est* codd. G aa *erit plena*.

en: So codd. E G L aa bb; codd. I K read *Beati ergo*, other codices and the editions *Item Beati*. For *plena est* codd. G aa read *erit plena*.

la: Cfr. I. Sent. d. 13. dub. 8. — Edd. addunt *dictum est*, cod. O *est*. Inferius post *creaturam* a cod. S additur *puram*, et post *omnia* a cod. F *ideo*.

en: Cf. I *Sentences*, d. 13, dub. 8. — The editions add *dictum est*, cod. O *est*. Below, after *creaturam* cod. S adds *puram*, and after *omnia* cod. F adds *ideo*.

la: Vide I. Sent. d. 18. q. 1. — In fine solut. multi codd. et ed. 1 omittunt *ei*, cod. K (I a secunda manu) *ad ipsum*.

en: See I *Sentences*, d. 18, q. 1. — At the end of the solution many codices and ed. 1 omit *ei*; cod. K (I by a second hand) reads *ad ipsum*. ---

latin_scholion:
**I.** Concilium Trident. (Sess. XXV. decret. *de invocatione et venerat. et reliquiis Sanctor.*) secundum s. Scripturam et perpetuam traditionem docet: « Sanctos una cum Christo regnantes orationes suas pro hominibus Deo offerre; bonum atque utile esse suppliciter eos invocare; et ob beneficia impetranda a Deo per Filium eius Iesum Christum, Dominum nostrum, qui solus redemptor et salvator est, ad eorum orationes, opem auxiliumque confugere » etc. — Conclusiones igitur trium quaestionum sunt *de fide*; unde etiam certum est, aliquo modo eosdem nostras orationes cognoscere (quamvis, absolute loquendo, pro nobis intercedere possent, quin per se ipsos scirent nostras preces, Deo eos ad suffragandam nobis movente). Hoc docet S. Bonav. infra q. 3. ad 4, dub. 9. et d. 50. p. II. a. 1. q. 2, et speciali quaestione probat S. Thom. (hic q. 3. a. 1; Suppl. q. 72. a. 1.). De quatuor modis, quibus preces a Sanctis sciri possint, cfr. Estius (hic § 19.). Communiter docetur, Sanctos in Verbo tanquam speculo voluntario videre ea quae ad ipsos pertinent. Nam, ut uterque S. Doctor locis citt. expresse asserit, et ut per se patet, Sancti videndo Verbum non vident omnia quae in ipso sunt. — Scot., qui hic (q. 1-3.) fuse disputat de *naturali* cognitione animarum separatarum, idem docet, tamen putat (q. 4. n. 2. seqq.), etiam naturali vi eosdem posse nostras orationes videre. — Alii Lombardi commentatores totum hunc articulum aliter distribuunt, unde una citatione eos allegamus.

De tribus huius art. quaestionibus: Scot., hic q. 4. praesertim n. 5. — S. Thom., hic q. 3. a. 1-3; Suppl. q. 72. a. 1-3. — B. Albert., hic a. 12. — Petr. a Tar., hic q. 3. a. 1-3. — Richard. a Med., hic a. 7. q. 1-4. — Durand., hic q. 4. — Dionys. Carth., hic q. 3. 4.

---

english_scholion:
**I.** The Council of Trent (Sess. XXV, decree *on the invocation and veneration and relics of the Saints*), following holy Scripture and perpetual tradition, teaches: "that the Saints reigning together with Christ offer their prayers to God for men; that it is good and useful suppliantly to invoke them; and that, for the obtaining of benefits from God through his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who alone is redeemer and savior, one should have recourse to their prayers, their aid and their help," etc. — The conclusions, therefore, of the three questions are *of faith*; whence it is also certain that in some manner these same Saints know our prayers (although, absolutely speaking, they could intercede for us without themselves knowing our petitions, God moving them to give us their suffrage). This St. Bonaventure teaches below, q. 3, ad 4, dub. 9, and d. 50, p. II, a. 1, q. 2; and St. Thomas proves it in a special question (here q. 3, a. 1; Suppl. q. 72, a. 1). On the four ways in which prayers can be known by the Saints, cf. Estius (here § 19). It is commonly taught that the Saints see in the Word, as in a voluntary mirror, those things which pertain to them. For, as both holy Doctors expressly assert in the places cited, and as is clear of itself, the Saints in seeing the Word do not see all things that are in it. — Scotus, who here (q. 1-3) discusses at length the *natural* cognition of separated souls, teaches the same, yet holds (q. 4, n. 2 ff.) that even by natural power they can see our prayers. — Other commentators on the Lombard divide this whole article differently, whence we cite them with a single reference.

On the three questions of this article: Scotus, here q. 4, especially n. 5. — St. Thomas, here q. 3, a. 1-3; Suppl. q. 72, a. 1-3. — Bl. Albert, here a. 12. — Peter of Tarantasia, here q. 3, a. 1-3. — Richard of Middleton, here a. 7, q. 1-4. — Durandus, here q. 4. — Denis the Carthusian, here q. 3, 4.

---

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** Latin re-set from `raw/bonaventure_vol4_raw.txt` lines 100772–101022, with every damaged region (article opener, Respondeo, the three solutions, the scholion, and all three page footers) verified against the 450 dpi column bands `/tmp/colcrop/vol4-p{947,948,949}-{L,R}-{0,1,2}.png`, read left column top→bottom then right. No bands were regenerated; the existing crops were legible throughout.

**Page span verified from running heads.** The band read confirms the raw-line estimate for this chunk: p. 947 (lower half only — ARTICULUS III header, its rubric, the article opener, the QUAESTIO I header, and args 1–2), all of p. 948, and the top of p. 949 down to the end of the SCHOLION. The p. 949 running head reads `DIST. XLV. ART. III. QUAEST. II.` — page furniture naming the last item on the page, not this question; QUAESTIO II begins below the scholion on the same page.

**Page → apparatus split map (15 entries).**
- **p. 947 — notes 7, 8 only.** Notes 1–5 belong to art. II, q. 3 (they gloss *quam plurium*, *possint insimul*, *suffragia*, *subsidii/consilii*, and the canon *Non mediocriter*). Note 6, *"Vide scholion ad 1. huius articuli quaest."*, anchors at a2-q3's closing words *pro quo fit*⁶ and therefore also stays with a2-q3.
- **p. 948 — notes 1–11, all mine.** The whole printed page is this question's body.
- **p. 949 — notes 1, 2 only.** Note 1 anchors at *propter errorem Arii vitandum*, note 2 at *in quo omnia dona donantur*. Notes 3–6 anchor in QUAESTIO II's arguments and Respondeo.

**Hand-offs.**
- *Incoming (p. 947):* a2-q3 had not yet written its `## Notes` when this chunk was composed, so the p. 947 split was determined independently from the footer bands by content-matching each note to its anchor, as the dispatch permitted. Result: a2-q3 keeps notes 1–6, this chunk takes 7–8.
- *Outgoing (p. 949):* notes 3, 4, 5 and 6 of page 949 are forwarded to a3-q2 — `3` (*Cfr. hic lit. Magistri, c. 2, ubi simile dicitur de merito existentium in purgatorio…*; also *Pro tunc fit multi codd. et ed. 1 tunc sit…*), `4` (*Supple: in via*), `5` (*Quaest. praeced.*), and `6` (*Hic in lit. c. 6, in quo etiam seq. explicatio insinuatur. — Post pauca pro fidelissime edd. facillime*).

**Marker ordering.** Body anchors run in reading order while Quaracchi numbers the footers in column order, so on p. 948 the body legitimately runs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 but notes 6–11 are printed in the right-hand footer column. Each anchor was bound by content, not by position.

**Scholion placement.** The scholion is printed on p. 949 immediately after the two incidental solutions and before QUAESTIO II; per the repo convention it is rendered last in each language block. It covers all three questions of Article III, which is why a3-q2 and a3-q3 correctly carry none.

**Page-break comments.** Printed breaks fall mid-sentence (p. 947/948 inside arg. 2, at *Ego rogabo Patrem, | et alium Paraclitum*; p. 948/949 inside the first incidental solution, at *di- | cendum*). The `<!-- page -->` comments are therefore placed at the nearest paragraph boundary after each break.

**OCR corrections made silently.** `ARTICULUS 111.` → *ARTICULUS III.*; `SCHOLIOK` → *SCHOLION*; `terlium` → *tertium*; `Vtrum` → *Utrum*; `simt` → *sunt*; `Sancli` → *Sancti*; `oranl` → *orant*; `interpelland.um` → *interpellandum*; `sciiicet` → *scilicet*; `propiHi` → *proprii*; `qnando` → *quando*; `raodo` → *modo*; `^t` → *et*; `oiunes` → *omnes*; `bealitudinis` → *beatitudinis*; `7ni-seri` → *miseri*; `Chrislo` → *Christo*; `qnod` → *quod*; `docelur` → *docetur*; `au.ijiliumque` → *auxiliumque*; `Conclusionos` → *Conclusiones*; `oosdem` → *eosdem*; `praeser-timn. 5.` → *praesertim n. 5.*; `d. !7.` → *d. 17.*; `\-3` → *1-3*. In footer p. 948 note 2 the OCR's `lUietor.` and `elVicere` were resolved from the band as *Rhetor.* and *efficere*.

**`[?]` flags.** None. Every disputed reading was resolved at band time.


site: bonaventure

collection: Book IV: On the Sacraments

title: Dist. 45, Art. 3, Q. 2

author: St. Bonaventure

languages: en la

title: Opera Omnia (Quaracchi critical edition)

publisher: Collegii S. Bonaventurae

source_text:
<!-- page 949 -->

> **On the apparatus numbering.** Quaracchi restarts its footer numbering on every printed page, so this chunk carries two per-page series, given here as page-qualified labels. This chunk claims notes 3–6 of page 949 (notes 1–2 of that page anchor in the preceding question, a. 3 q. 1) and notes 1–5 of page 950 (notes 6–9 of that page anchor in the following question, a. 3 q. 3).

### Quaestio II. *Utrum Sancti nobis aliqua impetrent suis orationibus.*

Secundo quaeritur, utrum Sancti impetrent nobis aliqua suis orationibus. Et quod non, videtur:

1. Quia nullus impetrat aliquid apud Deum, nisi qui est in statu merendi; sed Sancti non sunt in statu merendi: ergo etc. *Si dicas*, quod non merito, quod tunc fit, sed quod praecessit[^p949-3]; *contra*: hoc non solvit, quia secundum hoc, etiam si non rogent, nihilominus obtinebimus: ergo nihil nobis facit oratio eorum. *Praeterea*, ipsi sufficienter remunerati sunt de toto eo, quod meruerunt: ergo non meruerunt aliquid aliud: ergo ratione meriti praecedentis non impetrant.

2. Item, Sancti per omnia conformant voluntatem suam voluntati divinae: ergo non orant nec petunt, nisi quod Deus vult dare; sed quod Deus vult dare dabit, etiam si Sancti non petant: ergo etc.

3. Item, Sancti vident, utrum orationes nostrae sint exaudiendae, et si non sunt exaudiendae, non petunt: ergo petunt, cum sunt exaudiendae; sed si non peterent, nihilominus petitiones exaudiendae exaudirentur: ergo eorum oratio nihil facit.

**Contra:**
1. Sancti in via impetrant aliis gratiam et multa bona; sed plus possunt apud Deum in patria quam in via: ergo magis impetrant.

3. Item, Sancti impetrant[^p949-4] pro vivis, quia sunt amici Dei; sed magis sunt amici Dei in patria quam in via: ergo efficacius impetrant.

3. Item, ostenditur *per impossibile*: quia, si non impetrant et orant, sicut supra[^p949-5] monstratum est, ergo frustra orant et sunt miseri, quia non impletur eorum voluntas.

4. Item, Sancti ita faciunt miracula post mortem, ut ante: ergo ita impetrant post mortem, ut ante.

### Conclusio.

> *Sanctorum orationes multa nobis bona impetrant.*

**Respondeo:** Dicendum, quod Sanctorum orationes multa nobis bona impetrant, sicut dicit Magister[^p949-6], «merito et affectu»; merito quidem praecedenti, quo Deo fidelissime servierunt et tantum locum suis meritis sunt adepti, ut non solum sibi beatitudinem et gloriam meruerint, sed etiam aliis suffragari. — Multa etiam supererogaverunt affectu: quia amici Dei sunt facti, et «amicitia est idem

<!-- page 950 -->

velle et nolle[^p950-1]»; et cum aliquem ament Sancti, compellunt, ut sic dicam, Deum diligere. Unde beata Virgo multos peccatores Deo reconciliare dicitur.

1. Ad illud ergo quod obiicitur, quod non sunt in statu merendi; dicendum, quod verum est *sibi*. Et *praeterea*, non redditur exauditio merito, quod tunc fit, sed merito, quod praecessit. — Quod obiicitur, quod tunc sine oratione fieret; dicendum, quod meruerunt non *simpliciter*, quod isti obtinerent[^p950-2], sed *sub conditione*, videlicet si ipsi intercederent, vel alii eorum subsidia implorarent; sicut aliqui Sancti in morte petierunt, quod Dominus exaudiret invocantes eorum patrocinium. — Et quod dicit, quod meritum eorum est plene remuneratum; verum est de merito *absoluto*, sed de merito *conditionato* adhuc[^p950-3] stat conditio et merendi ratio.

2. 3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod conformant voluntatem suam divinae per omnia; dicendum, quod, sicut dicit Augustinus, *de Praedestinatione Sanctorum*[^p950-4], quod «orare debemus pro praedestinatis, quia fortasse praedestinati sunt, ut nostris orationibus concedantur»; et si constaret nobis hoc totum, quod essent praevisi salvari ad nostras preces; deberemus utique pro eis rogare, et fructuose rogaremus, quia ad preces nostras salvantur. Sic intelligendum est in Sanctis, qui vident, quod Deus decrevit nos salvare ad ipsorum preces; ideo instantissime rogant et impetrant[^p950-5].

---

english:
### Question II. *Whether the Saints obtain anything for us by their prayers.*

In the second place it is asked whether the Saints obtain anything for us by their prayers. And that they do not, seems [to be the case]:

1. Because no one obtains anything from God except one who is in the state of meriting; but the Saints are not in the state of meriting: therefore etc. *If you say* that [it is] not by the merit which is performed then, but by that which preceded[^p949-3]; *on the contrary*: this does not resolve it, because according to this, even if they do not ask, we shall nonetheless obtain: therefore their prayer does nothing for us. *Moreover*, they themselves have been sufficiently rewarded for the whole of that which they merited: therefore they did not merit anything else: therefore by reason of preceding merit they do not obtain.

2. Likewise, the Saints in all things conform their will to the divine will: therefore they neither pray nor ask, except what God wills to give; but what God wills to give he will give, even if the Saints do not ask: therefore etc.

3. Likewise, the Saints see whether our prayers are to be heard, and if they are not to be heard, they do not ask: therefore they ask when they are to be heard; but if they were not to ask, the petitions that are to be heard would nonetheless be heard: therefore their prayer does nothing.

**On the contrary:**
1. The Saints on the way obtain grace and many goods for others; but they can do more with God in the fatherland than on the way: therefore they obtain the more.

3. Likewise, the Saints obtain[^p949-4] for the living, because they are friends of God; but they are more the friends of God in the fatherland than on the way: therefore they obtain the more efficaciously.

3. Likewise, it is shown *by way of the impossible*: because if they do not obtain and yet pray, as was shown above[^p949-5], then they pray in vain and are wretched, because their will is not fulfilled.

4. Likewise, the Saints work miracles after death just as before: therefore they likewise obtain after death, just as before.

### Conclusion.

> *The prayers of the Saints obtain many good things for us.*

**I respond:** It must be said that the prayers of the Saints obtain many good things for us, as the Master says[^p949-6], "by merit and by affection"; by merit indeed that preceded, whereby they served God most faithfully and attained by their merits so great a station that they merited not only beatitude and glory for themselves, but also to give suffrage to others. — They also supererogated many things by affection: because they were made the friends of God, and "friendship is the same willing

<!-- page 950 -->

and not-willing[^p950-1]"; and when the Saints love someone, they compel God, so to speak, to love [him]. Hence the Blessed Virgin is said to reconcile many sinners to God.

1. To that, then, which is objected, that they are not in the state of meriting; it must be said that this is true *for themselves*. And *moreover*, the hearing is not rendered to a merit which is performed then, but to a merit which preceded. — As to what is objected, that then it would come about without prayer; it must be said that they merited not *simply* that these persons should obtain[^p950-2], but *under a condition*, namely if they themselves should intercede, or others should implore their aid; just as some Saints at their death asked that the Lord would hear those invoking their patronage. — And as to what is said, that their merit is fully rewarded; that is true of *absolute* merit, but as regards *conditioned* merit the condition and the ground of meriting still[^p950-3] stands.

2. 3. To that which is objected, that they conform their will to the divine in all things; it must be said that, as Augustine says in *On the Predestination of the Saints*[^p950-4], "we ought to pray for the predestined, because perhaps they are predestined in such a way that they may be granted to our prayers"; and if this whole matter were established for us, that they were foreseen to be saved at our prayers; we ought assuredly to pray for them, and we would pray fruitfully, because they are saved at our prayers. So it is to be understood in the Saints, who see that God has decreed to save us at their prayers; therefore they pray most insistently and obtain[^p950-5].

---

la: Cfr. hic lit. Magistri, c. 2, ubi simile dicitur de merito existentium in purgatorio respectu mitigationis poenarum. — Pro *tunc fit* multi codd. et ed. 1 *tunc sit*, quod plures codd. etiam infra in solut. huius arg. exhibent.

en: Cf. here the text of the Master, c. 2, where something similar is said of the merit of those existing in purgatory with respect to the mitigation of their punishments. — For *tunc fit* many codices and ed. 1 have *tunc sit*, which several codices also exhibit below in the solution of this argument.

la: Supple: *in via*.

en: Supply: *on the way*.

la: Quaest. praeced.

en: The preceding question.

la: Hic in lit. c. 6, in quo etiam seq. explicatio insinuatur. — Post pauca pro *fidelissime* edd. *facillime*.

en: Here in the text, c. 6, in which the following explanation is also intimated. — A little later, for *fidelissime* the editions have *facillime*.

la: Sallust., *Catilina* c. 20: *Nam idem velle atque nolle, ea demum firma amicitia est.* — Pro *Multa etiam* codd. *Multa enim*.

en: Sallust, *Catiline* c. 20: *For to will and not to will the same thing — that at last is firm friendship.* — For *Multa etiam* the codices have *Multa enim*.

la: Codd. A F G L P Q *iste obtineret*, codd. E I K *istud obtinerent*, Vat. *ista obtinerent*, omisso *sed*. Subinde pro *impetrarent* ex codd. A G K N Y aa substituimus *implorarent*.

en: Codices A F G L P Q have *iste obtineret*, codices E I K *istud obtinerent*, the Vatican codex *ista obtinerent*, with *sed* omitted. Thereupon, in place of *impetrarent*, we have substituted *implorarent* from codices A G K N Y aa.

la: Cod. S *sed non de conditionato, et ideo adhuc*.

en: Codex S has *sed non de conditionato, et ideo adhuc* ("but not of conditioned [merit], and therefore still").

la: Libro II, qui *de Dono perseverantiae* dicitur, c. 22. n. 60: *Fortassis enim sic praedestinati sunt, ut nostris orationibus concedantur et accipiant eandem gratiam, qua velint, atque efficiantur electi.* — Pro *concedantur* edd. *confirmentur*. Inferius pro *et fructuose*, quod praebent codd. L U, cod. F *nec infructuose*, alii codd. et edd. *ut fructuose*.

en: Book II, which is called *On the Gift of Perseverance*, c. 22, n. 60: *For perhaps they are predestined in such a way that they may be granted to our prayers and may receive that same grace by which they may will, and be made elect.* — For *concedantur* the editions have *confirmentur*. Below, in place of *et fructuose*, which codices L U supply, codex F has *nec infructuose*, other codices and the editions *ut fructuose*.

la: Cfr. hic lit. Magistri, c. 6. circa finem. — Vide scholion ad praecedentem quaest.

en: Cf. here the text of the Master, c. 6, near the end. — See the scholion on the preceding question. ---

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** Latin re-set from the IA djvu OCR, raw lines 101023–101100 of `raw/bonaventure_vol4_raw.txt`, verified column-by-column against the 450 dpi column bands for pp. 949 and 950. English translated literally, paragraph for paragraph.

**Page span.** Confirmed pp. 949–950 (PDF 969–970). The p. 949 running head is at raw L100983 (`DIST. XLV. ART. III. QUAEST. II.`); the p. 950 head is at raw L101078, where the OCR renders the page number `9b0` — the band read resolves it as **950**. `QUAESTIO II.` opens in the bottom third of p. 949 (after the article's scholion, which occupies the middle band of that page) and the chunk closes at the foot of p. 950's right column, immediately before `QUAESTIO III.`

**Bands regenerated.** Both pages' bands were clipped at the column gutter as originally cut. Regenerated at wider right-column splits: `python3.11 tools/colcrop.py vol4 950 1620 3 1.15` and `python3.11 tools/colcrop.py vol4 949 1620 3 1.15`. The wider crops are what resolved the *Contra* argument numbering and the footer numerals.

**Apparatus split map (9 entries).**
- **p. 949** — six footer notes, numbered continuously 1–6 across both columns (the OCR mangles the right-column numerals 4, 5, 6 into `*`, `2`, `^`; resolved at band time, which prints them plainly as 4, 5, 6 — there is **no** per-column restart). Notes **1–2** anchor in a. 3 q. 1's body (`creaturam`/`omnia` in the *Ad 1 quaest.*, and `donum, in quo omnia dona donantur` in the *Ad 2 quaest.*) and belong to that chunk. Notes **3–6** anchor here and are claimed here.
- **p. 950** — nine footer notes, numbered 1–9 continuously. Notes **1–5** anchor here and are claimed here. Notes **6–9** anchor in a. 3 q. 3 (`latria est cultus soli Deo debitus`; `Angeli portant petitiones`; `volentem`; `eorum patrocinio efficiatur dignus`) and are forwarded to that chunk.

**Hand-offs.**
- *Incoming (p. 949):* a. 3 q. 1 had not yet written its `## Notes` when this chunk was set, so the p. 949 split was determined here directly from the bands, by which notes this body anchors. Recorded above for reconciliation: **a. 3 q. 1 takes p. 949 notes 1–2; this chunk takes 3–6.**
- *Outgoing (p. 950):* **a. 3 q. 3 takes p. 950 notes 6–9.** Their Latin text sits at raw L101163–101183, in the same footer block whose notes 1–5 are rendered above.

**No scholion.** `has_scholion: false` is correct and is confirmed by the source itself: p. 950 note 5 reads *Vide scholion ad praecedentem quaest.* Article III's single scholion is printed under q. 1 (raw L100994, where the OCR garbles the header as `SCHOLIOK`) and covers all three of the article's questions.

**Editorial observations (resolved at band time, not flagged).**
- The *Contra* series is printed **1, 3, 3, 4** — the second member is numbered `3.` where `2.` is expected. This is a Quaracchi typographical error, not an OCR artifact: the wide right-column band shows `3. Item, Sancti impetrant⁴ pro vivis` and `3. Item, ostenditur per impossibile` plainly. Transcribed as printed.
- The solutio is headed `2. 3. Ad illud quod obiicitur…`, answering objections 2 and 3 together; printed as such and retained.

**`[?]` flags.** None.

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. 45, Art. 3, Q. 3

source_text:
<!-- page 950 -->

> Quaracchi restarts its footnote numbering on every printed page, so this chunk carries two per-page sequences. Footnote labels here are page-qualified: notes 6 through 9 of printed page 950, then notes 1 through 3 of printed page 951. Notes 1 through 5 of page 950 anchor in the preceding quaestio, and notes 4 through 8 of page 951 anchor in the dubia that follow; neither set is rendered here.

### Quaestio III. *Utrum utile sit nobis rogare Sanctos.*

Tertio quaeritur, utrum utile sit nobis rogare Sanctos. Et quod non, videtur:

1. Quia iste qui convertitur ad rogandum Sanctos, aut est *dignus* exaudiri, aut *non*. Si est *dignus*, etiam sine Sanctis exaudietur; si *non* est dignus, etiam cum Sanctis non exaudietur, nec Sancti rogabunt pro ipso: ergo etc.

2. Item, oratio est species *latriae*; sed « *latria est cultus soli Deo debitus*[^p950-6] »: ergo oratio debet fieri soli Deo. — *Si dicas*, quod est species non tantum *latriae*, sed etiam *duliae*; ergo si magis debemus honorare maiores, videtur, quod *male facit* qui instantius rogat minores; et hoc videtur *stultitia*, quia maiores Sancti, ut beata Virgo, potentiores sunt in conspectu Dei.

3. Item, Deus est nobis misericordior et praesentior quam aliquis Sanctus; sed stultus esset qui posset adire regem et inveniret eum benigniorem quam principem, qui, relicto rege, adiret principem: ergo etc.

4. Item, Sancti sunt nobis absentes; sed stultus est qui absenti loquitur: ergo stultus est qui a Sanctis aliquid petit. *Forte dices*, quod ipsi vident in Deo; *contra:* Angeli portant petitiones[^p950-7]; sed si lucerent in Verbo, frustra portarent: ergo etc.

**Contra:**

1. Nos debemus Sanctos Dei honorare; sed qui orat aliquem ipsum honorat: ergo etc.

2. Item, plus possunt Sancti in curia Dei quam aliqui principes in curia regis; sed sapientiae est, volentem[^p950-8] impetrare in curia regis deprecari principes: ergo etc.

3. Item, hoc facit communiter Ecclesia; et constat, quod non errat: ergo etc.

### Conclusio.

> Deus decrevit et voluit, quod Sanctos rogaremus.

**Respondeo:** Dicendum, quod Deus decrevit et voluit, quod Sanctos rogaremus, triplici ex causa, scilicet propter *nostram inopiam*, *Sanctorum gloriam* et *Dei reverentiam*. — Propter *inopiam* in *merendo*, ut ubi nostra non suppeterent merita, patrocinentur aliena; propter inopiam in *contemplando*, ut qui non possumus summam lucem aspicere in se, aspiciamus in Sanctis; propter inopiam in *amando*, quia miser homo se magis sentit affici circa unum Sanctum quam etiam circa Deum. Ideo compassus *nostrae inopiae* voluit, nos rogare Sanctos. — Ac per hoc patet primum: quia ille qui ante erat indignus, rogat Sanctos, ut eorum patrocinio efficiatur dignus[^p950-9].

*Secunda* causa est *Sanctorum gloria*: quia Deus vult Sanctos suos glorificare, vult per eos

<!-- page 951 -->

miracula facere in[^p951-1] corporibus et salutem in animabus, ut ipsos laudemus; et hoc non tantum per supremos Sanctos, sed etiam infimos; unde sicut aliquis sanatur corporaliter invocando Linum et non invocando Petrum, alius e converso: sic et spiritualiter. — Et sic patet secundum, quia Deus vult, honorem duliae omnibus Sanctis dari.

*Tertia* causa est *Dei reverentia*, ut peccator, qui Deum offendit, quasi non audeat Deum in propria persona adire, sed amicorum patrocinium implorare. — Et sic patet tertium obiectum, quia bonum est aliquando a Deo resilire ob reverentiam.

4. Ad illud autem quod obiicitur, quod sunt absentes; dicendum secundum Magistrum[^p951-2], quod revelantur a Verbo eatenus, qua expedit saluti nostrae. — Et quod dicitur de Angelis, quod offerunt Deo petitiones nostras; hoc dicitur, quia ipsum consulunt super petitionibus nostris, ut sciant, qualiter erga nos debeant ministrare. — *Si autem quaeratur*, qualiter quis invocet beatum Petrum, cum sit mortuus; dicendum, quod invocatur *spiritus* Petri; et quoniam spiritus habet *esse* gloriosum et perfectum: ideo, ne videamur eius gloriam diminuere, *synecdochica* locutione quod est totius attribuimus parti, vel locutionem, quam dirigimus ad animam, attribuimus toti. Et sic patet illud[^p951-3].

---

english:
<!-- page 950 -->

### Question III. *Whether it is useful for us to entreat the Saints.*

Thirdly it is asked whether it is useful for us to entreat the Saints. And that it is not seems the case:

1. Because that man who turns to entreating the Saints either is *worthy* to be heard or *not*. If he is *worthy*, he will be heard even without the Saints; if he is *not* worthy, he will not be heard even with the Saints, nor will the Saints entreat on his behalf: therefore etc.

2. Likewise, prayer is a species of *latria*; but « *latria is the worship due to God alone*[^p950-6] »: therefore prayer ought to be made to God alone. — *If you say* that it is a species not only of *latria* but also of *dulia*; then, if we ought rather to honor the greater, it seems that *he does ill* who more insistently entreats the lesser; and this seems *folly*, since the greater Saints, such as the blessed Virgin, are more powerful in the sight of God.

3. Likewise, God is more merciful and more present to us than any Saint; but a man would be foolish who, being able to approach the king and finding him kinder than the prince, should leave the king aside and approach the prince: therefore etc.

4. Likewise, the Saints are absent from us; but he is foolish who speaks to one who is absent: therefore he is foolish who asks anything of the Saints. *Perhaps you will say* that they see [it] in God; *on the contrary:* the Angels carry up our petitions[^p950-7]; but if they were shining in the Word, they would carry them in vain: therefore etc.

**On the contrary:**

1. We ought to honor the Saints of God; but he who prays to someone honors him: therefore etc.

2. Likewise, the Saints can do more in the court of God than any princes can in the court of the king; but it belongs to wisdom that one wishing[^p950-8] to obtain [something] in the king's court should entreat the princes: therefore etc.

3. Likewise, the Church commonly does this; and it is established that she does not err: therefore etc.

### Conclusion.

> God has decreed and willed that we should entreat the Saints.

**I respond:** It must be said that God has decreed and willed that we should entreat the Saints, for a threefold cause, namely on account of *our neediness*, *the glory of the Saints*, and *the reverence of God*. — On account of *neediness* in *meriting*, so that where our own merits should not suffice, those of others may plead for us; on account of neediness in *contemplating*, so that we who cannot look upon the highest light in itself may look upon it in the Saints; on account of neediness in *loving*, because wretched man feels himself more affected toward one Saint than even toward God. Therefore, having compassion on *our neediness*, he willed that we should entreat the Saints. — And by this the first [objection] is plain: because he who before was unworthy entreats the Saints, that by their patronage he may be made worthy[^p950-9].

The *second* cause is *the glory of the Saints*: because God wills to glorify his Saints, he wills through them

<!-- page 951 -->

to work miracles in[^p951-1] bodies and salvation in souls, that we may praise them; and this not only through the highest Saints, but also through the lowest; whence, just as one man is healed bodily by invoking Linus and not by invoking Peter, and another the other way round: so also spiritually. — And thus the second [objection] is plain, because God wills that the honor of dulia be given to all the Saints.

The *third* cause is *the reverence of God*, so that the sinner, who has offended God, may as it were not dare to approach God in his own person, but rather implore the patronage of his friends. — And thus the third objection is plain, because it is sometimes good to draw back from God out of reverence.

4. But to that which is objected, that they are absent; it must be said, according to the Master[^p951-2], that things are revealed [to them] by the Word so far as is expedient for our salvation. — And as to what is said of the Angels, that they offer our petitions to God; this is said because they consult him concerning our petitions, that they may know how they ought to minister toward us. — *But if it be asked* how anyone invokes blessed Peter, since he is dead; it must be said that the *spirit* of Peter is invoked; and since the spirit has a glorious and perfect *being*: therefore, lest we seem to diminish his glory, by a *synecdochic* manner of speech we attribute to the part what belongs to the whole, or the speech which we direct to the soul we attribute to the whole. And thus that [objection] is plain[^p951-3].

---

la: Secundum August., X. de Civ. Dei, c. 1. n. 2. Cfr. III. Sent. d. 9. a. 2. q. 1. seqq., ubi etiam de *dulia*. — Verbis *Si dicas* plures codd. et ed. 1 praefigunt *Item*. Subinde pro *debemus*, quod in pluribus codd. desideratur, nonnulli codd. *debet*, et pro *honorare* cod. L *orare*.

en: According to Augustine, X *On the City of God*, c. 1, n. 2. Cf. III Sentences, d. 9, a. 2, q. 1 ff., where *dulia* is also treated. — Before the words *Si dicas* several codices and ed. 1 prefix *Item*. Thereupon, for *debemus*, which is wanting in several codices, some codices read *debet*; and for *honorare* cod. L reads *orare*.

la: Tob. 12, 12. dicit Raphael: *Ego obtuli orationem tuam Domino*. — Pro *lucerent* cod. F *viderent*.

en: Tobit 12:12, Raphael says: *I offered thy prayer to the Lord*. — For *lucerent* (were shining) cod. F reads *viderent* (were seeing).

la: Pro *volentem* cod. O *alicui volenti*.

en: For *volentem* cod. O reads *alicui volenti*.

la: Vat. *indignus de se, rogando* [etiam alii codd., excepto A, *rogando*] *Sanctos, eorum patrocinio efficitur dignus*.

en: The Vatican edition reads *indignus de se, rogando* [so too the other codices, except A, *rogando*] *Sanctos, eorum patrocinio efficitur dignus* — "unworthy of himself, by entreating the Saints he is made worthy by their patronage."

la: Cod. X *facere, sanitatem in*.

en: Cod. X reads *facere, sanitatem in* ("to work… health in").

la: Hic in lit. c. 6, ubi etiam de seq. solut.

en: Here in the text [of the Master], c. 6, where the following solution is also treated.

la: Vide scholion ad 1. huius art. quaest. — Superius post *vel* cod. G addit *potius*, quod edd. verbo *attribuimus* praefigunt.

en: See the scholion on the first quaestio of this article. — Above, after *vel*, cod. G adds *potius*, which the editions prefix to the verb *attribuimus*. ---

translators_notes:
> No scholion is rendered here (`has_scholion: false`). Article III carries a single scholion covering all three of its quaestiones, and it is keyed to `bon-sent-IV-d45-a3-q1` (raw L100994, where the OCR garbles the header as `SCHOLIOK`). Note p951-3 of this chunk explicitly points the reader there ("Vide scholion ad 1. huius art. quaest.").

- **Provenance.** Latin reflowed from raw OCR (`raw/bonaventure_vol4_raw.txt`, L101101–L101206), re-set column-by-column against 450 dpi PDF bands `/tmp/colcrop/vol4-p95{0,1}-{L,R}-{0,1,2}.png` (printed pp. 950–951 = pdf pp. 970–971, offset +20). Per the Vol II/IV override the bands are authoritative wherever the OCR cascade-shattered (the Conclusio, Respondeo, the *Ad*-responses, and every footer); the OCR served as base for the clean *videtur*/*contra* prose and for marker placement. English is a literal parallel rendering.
- **Page span verified.** The p.950 running head is OCR-dropped, but the band `vol4-p950-L-0.png` shows the printed folio "950" at the head of the left column, and `vol4-p951-R-0.png` shows "951" at the head of the right column with `DIST. XLV. DUBIA.` as the left-hand running head. The skeleton's `printed_pages: [950, 951]` is therefore correct and unchanged.
- **Page break.** `<!-- page 951 -->` falls inside the *Secunda causa* paragraph: p.950 ends "…vult per eos", p.951 opens "miracula facere in corporibus…".
- **Closing boundary.** The `DIST. XLV. DUBIA.` string at raw L101189 is the page-951 running head bleeding into the OCR stream, **not** a section start. The bands confirm the body continues beneath it in both columns (left: *miracula facere… quod sunt absentes*; right: *dicendum secundum Magistrum… Et sic patet illud*). The chunk therefore legitimately runs through L101206 and closes on the complete sentence "Et sic patet illud." The genuine `DUBIA CIRCA LITTERAM MAGISTRI.` header stands at L101207 and is left to the dubia chunk. Nothing of this quaestio has been absorbed into the dubia.
- **Page-split map — p.950 (9 notes total).** Notes 1–4 (Sallust *Catilina*; *iste obtineret*; cod. S *sed non de conditionato*; August. *De dono perseverantiae*) all anchor in the left column above this question, i.e. in **a3-q2**. Note 5 (*Cfr. hic lit. Magistri, c. 6… Vide scholion ad praecedentem quaest.*) anchors at a3-q2's closing "…instantissime rogant et impetrant⁵" and likewise belongs to **a3-q2**. Notes **6–9** anchor in this quaestio (arg. 2 *latria*; arg. 4 *petitiones*; contra 2 *volentem*; Respondeo *dignus*) and are rendered here. **a3-q2 was still a skeleton when this chunk was written, so this split was determined independently from the bands; the coordinator should reconcile it against a3-q2's own Notes.**
- **Page-split map — p.951 (8 notes total).** Notes **1–3** anchor in this quaestio and are rendered here. Notes 4–8 (August. *XII de Gen. ad lit.* c. 35; *Cfr. infra d. 49. p. II.*; Ioan. 20, 29; Eccle. 3, 18; Exod. 29, 33 / Num. 5, 8) all anchor below the `DUBIA CIRCA LITTERAM MAGISTRI.` header, in DUB. I and DUB. II, and are **forwarded to the dubia chunk (L101207–101427)**. This claim is stated precisely because the dubia writer was running concurrently.
- **Band read overriding the OCR.** The final marker of the chunk ("Et sic patet illud…") prints as a worn glyph that both the djvu OCR (`illud°`) and a first band pass read as an **8**. It is a **3**: p.951 note 3 reads "Superius post *vel* cod. G addit *potius*, quod edd. verbo *attribuimus* praefigunt," which matches this sentence verbatim ("…vel locutionem… attribuimus toti"), whereas note 8 (Exod. 29, 33 on *placabile sacrificium*) matches DUB. II's "hostiae enim placant… poenae inflictione." Bound by content per the apparatus rule; resolved at band time, not parked as a flag.
- **Bands regenerated.** Yes. The stock left-column crops for pp. 950–951 were clipped at the column gutter (text truncated mid-line). Both pages were regenerated wider with `python3.11 tools/colcrop.py vol4 950 2120 3 1.15` and `python3.11 tools/colcrop.py vol4 951 2120 3 1.15`.
- **Marginalia.** The printed side-notes (*Ad oppositum.*, *Fundamenta.*, *Concl.*, *Causa 1./2./3.*, *Ad 1. arg.*, *Ad 2. arg.*, *Ad 3. arg.*, *Ad 4. arg.*, *Quaest. incid. solvitur.*) are Quaracchi's editorial furniture and are not rendered inline, per the volume's established convention.
- **[?] flags.** None.


title: Dist. 45, Dubia

title_alt: Doubts concerning the text of the Master

source_text:
<!-- page 951 -->

### DUBIA CIRCA LITTERAM MAGISTRI.

> The numbered notes below are Quaracchi's page footers. Quaracchi restarts its footnote
> numbering on every printed page, so the labels here are page-qualified: notes 4–8 of page 951,
> notes 1–9 of page 952, and notes 1–10 of page 953. Notes 1–3 of page 951 anchor in the preceding
> chunk (a.3 q.3) and are not repeated here.

### Dub. I.

In parte ista sunt dubitationes circa litteram, et primo dubitatur de hoc quod dicit, quod *maius erit gaudium Sanctorum in resurrectione*. Videtur enim male dicere, quia gaudium Beatorum totum consistit in visione Dei; sed visio Dei tota est animae, non corporum: ergo si animae sunt in statu comprehensionis et completae visionis, ergo ipsarum gaudium nunquam augebitur.

**Respondeo:** Dicendum, quod *gaudium augeri* est dupliciter: vel *numerositate*, vel *intensione* sive qualitative. Augmentum gaudii quantum ad *numerositatem* non ponit augmentum in praemio *essentiali*, quia illud est in uno solo, sed in praemio *accidentali*, quod consistit in gaudio de bono creato; et illud potest augeri, maxime quantum ad *obiectum*, ut de pluribus gaudeat tunc quam prius. — Si loquamur *intensive*, sic non augetur nisi *per accidens*, quia inclinatio animae ad corpus, quae ipsam retardat, « ne tota intentione feratur in summum caelum[^p951-4] », illa, inquam, auferetur. Et sic patet, quomodo istud potest intelligi dupliciter. — Aliqui tamen non habent pro inconvenienti, quod *simpliciter* tunc augeatur et gaudium, quia magis aperietur Dei Verbum ad illuminandum, et per consequens ad delectandum[^p951-5].

### Dub. II.

Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit, quod *animas abditis receptaculis tenet*; quaeritur, pro quanto dicantur abdita receptacula.

Et dicendum, quod receptacula illa dicuntur *abdita*, non quia sint alia receptacula animarum nunc et post iudicium, sed quia eadem nunc sunt nobis incognita, sed post iudicium et resurrectionem erunt nobis nota. — Si autem quaeratur ratio; dicendum, quod ratio huius est, ut *fides habeat locum*, quae est de non visis; unde meremur et in credendo paradisum et in credendo infernum, cum iam non videamus. *Beati enim qui non viderunt et crediderunt*[^p951-6]. — Non tantum est autem ad fidei meritum, sed etiam ad *probandum humanum affectum*; unde voluit Dominus, quod mors nostra similis esset morti bestiarum, ut probaret corda filiorum hominum[^p951-7].

### Dub. III.

Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit, quod *sacrificio salutari non est dubium mortuos adiuvari*. Videtur enim falsum dicere, quia sacrificium altaris est Sacramentum Ecclesiae; sed Sacramenta Ecclesiae non prosunt nisi in statu viatoris: ergo etc. — Item, quaeritur iuxta hoc: cum alia Sacramenta non prosint post mortem, unde est, quod hoc Sacramentum altaris prodest?

**Respondeo:** Dicendum, quod aliter prodest Sacramentum altaris *vivis*, aliter *mortuis*. Vivis enim prodest sub ratione *Sacramenti* et cibi, mortuis autem prodest sub ratione *sacrificii*. In quantum enim Sacramentum est, cibat et dat gratiam et perfectionem manducanti. In quantum autem sacrificium, Deum placat; hostiae enim placant[^p951-8]; et quoniam Deus iratus est, non affectione, sed poenae inflictione:

<!-- page 952 -->

ideo Deum placando non sedat ipsius affectionem, sed remitti facit poenae acerbitatem.

Quod quaeritur quare alia Sacramenta non prosunt? dicendum, quod aliorum Sacramentorum dispensatio respicit actum in persona vel circa personam, sicut patet in baptismo; et ideo non potest baptizari nisi qui praesto est in aquam mergi; sed sacrificium est actus pro persona. Et quoniam actus in personam requirit personam actu existentem, sed pro persona non; sicut Christus obtulit se Patri pro illis qui fuerunt et qui futuri sunt[^p952-1], sic sacrificium prodest his qui finierunt vitam.

### Dub. IV.

Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit, quod *pauperes Christi sibi fecerunt amicos de mammona iniquitatis*. Secundum hoc obiicitur: quia qui diligit alium et orat pro pecunia, dat spirituale pro temporali; et omnis talis est simoniacus: ergo etc.

**Respondeo:** Dicendum, quod mammona hic appellatur possessio terrena; de hac facit homo sibi pauperes amicos, dum eorum subvenit necessitatibus[^p952-2]; pauperes enim Christi grati sunt beneficiis. Et ita patet, quod beneficium temporale non est sicut finis motivus, sed sicut aliquid inducens; et quoniam hoc non principaliter intendunt, ideo propter hoc non orant finaliter; et oratio non venditur, sed impetratur per accidens, scilicet per acquisitionem amoris.

### Dub. V.

Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicitur, quod *iniuria est pro Martyre orare in Ecclesia*. Videtur enim male dicere, quia orationes « pro valde bonis sunt gratiarum actiones[^p952-3] »; sed qui agit gratiam pro Sanctis non facit eis iniuriam: ergo etc. — Item, quod licet nobis desiderare licet et petere; sed desiderare possumus honorem Sanctorum: ergo orare debemus pro ipsorum honore.

**Respondeo:** Dicendum, quod Augustinus hic orare pro aliquo dicit orare pro eius salute; nullus autem orat[^p952-4] pro eo quod iam habet: si ergo constare debet nobis, quod Martyres statim beatificantur, sicut nullus debet de eorum gloria dubitare; ita nullus debet pro eis orare. Si enim orat, videtur praesumere, quod non fuerit in gloria, et ita quod non sit Martyr vere; et non tantum praesumere, sed etiam exterius innuere, ac per hoc iniuriam Martyri facere.

Quod ergo obiicitur, quod sunt gratiarum actiones; dicendum, quod istud est verum, quando Ecclesia de salute alicuius potest probabiliter dubitare.

Quod obiicitur, quod desiderandus est honor Sanctorum; dicendum, quod verum est; sed cum hoc petimus, non ipsis[^p952-5] Sanctis petimus, sed petimus nobis, ut nobis innotescat eorum virtus perfecta, et detur affectio bona ad laudem divinam, sive ipsorum. — Si quis tamen contendat, hoc esse orare pro Martyre; dicendum, quod isto modo non intelligit Augustinus, sed eo, quod orare pro aliquo est petere salutem eius, vel accelerationem salutis[^p952-6].

### Dub. VI.

Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit: *Nec habebat tantae perfectionis merita, quae his suffragiis non egerent*. Videtur enim, quod omnes sint tales, quia super illud secundae ad Corinthios octavo[^p952-7]: *Ut illorum abundantia*; Glossa: « Qui vivunt in hoc saeculo non habent merita ad vitam sufficientia, nisi iuventur merito Christi et Angelorum ». — Sed contrarium videtur: quia aut habet veram caritatem, aut non. Si non: ergo nullum habet meritum; si habet: ergo cum habeat Spiritum sanctum, et ita pignus hereditatis aeternae[^p952-8], habet sufficientiam.

**Respondeo:** Dicendum, quod tria sunt genera hominum habentium caritatem in hac vita. Quidam enim habent caritatem perfectam et absolutionem ab omni culpa et poena, et tales sibi sufficiunt; sed hi potius sunt in caelis quam in terris; talium enim conversatio in caelis est[^p952-9]. — Quidam habent perfectum amorem, tamen propter mala opera praecedentia sunt obligati ad poenam; et tales indigent suffragiis, non ad salutis obtentionem, sed accelerationem. — Quidam habent caritatem imperfectam, ita quod proni sunt ad casum et obligati sunt multis reatibus peccatorum; et tales vivunt in hoc sae-

<!-- page 953 -->

culo, licet non omnino se conforment saeculo, et indigent suffragiis, ut in caritate permaneant, et ut exeuntes de terra[^p953-1] tormenta non eos detineant.

### Dub. VII.

Item de hoc quod dicit: *Ut quodam modo eas offerant Deo* etc.; quaeritur, per quem modum Angeli offerunt Deo petitiones nostras, utrum scilicet propter se, an propter nos.

**Respondeo:** Dicendum, quod sicut videmus in causis terrenis, quod qui nescit loqui coram praetore conducit advocatum, qui loquatur et alleget pro ipso; sic in spiritualibus intelligendum, quod cum nos nec perorare, immo quasi nec balbutire sciamus coram Deo[^p953-2], quod Angelus tanquam advocatus et allegator magnus in illa superna curia assumit verbum et orationem nostram proponit.

Si autem quaeritur, per quem modum habeat esse; dico, quod loqui nostrum et oratio nostra est desiderium alicuius rei vel petitio formata secundum desiderium; et quando[^p953-3] desiderium nostrum ex mera et vera et ardenti dilectione est, tunc fortiter clamamus in auribus Dei et tunc optime peroramus. Et quoniam affectiones nostrae sunt tepidae, et affectiones Angelorum ferventissimae et magis elevatae ad ipsum; desiderando pro nobis quod nos desideramus, cum accedant ad Deum familiarius et proximius, dicuntur sibi offerre; et quod Deus vidit nos primo petere et approbare per os nostrum, secundo magis approbat per os et desiderium Angelorum. Et quoniam istud dicitur *noscere*, quod approbat[^p953-4]; hinc est, quod petitiones nostrae dicuntur apud Deum innotescere non solum per nos, verum etiam per Angelos. Angeli enim dicuntur loqui Deo per affectiones voluntatis et per adminiculum rationis, sicut exponit Gregorius super principium Iob[^p953-5].

### Dub. VIII.

Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit, quod *bonum est de operibus suis eius consulere veritatem*. Videtur enim male dicere: quia istud consilium dicit inquisitionem, et ita ratiocinationem; sed Angeli, ut dicit Dionysius[^p953-6], habent intellectum deiformem: ergo in eis non cadit consilium.

**Respondeo:** Dicendum, quod consulere aliquem hoc est dupliciter: aut ut per indagationem et inquisitionis discussionem perveniat ad cognitionem rei dubiae; aut ut per illustrationem eius subito cognoscat, quomodo debeat facere[^p953-7]. Primum est humanum, secundum vero non solum humanum, sed etiam angelicum esse perhibetur.

### Dub. IX.

Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit: *Ut ipsi a Deo discant* etc. Videtur enim male dicere, quia beatus Gregorius[^p953-8] dicit: « Quid est quod non vident qui videntem omnia vident »?

**Respondeo:** Dicendum, quod multa addiscunt Angeli sive per ipsum Verbum et per alios Angelos, sive per experientiam[^p953-9]. Quod autem dicit Gregorius non intelligitur, quia omnia videant, sed quia vident istud unum, quod est melius videre quam omnia. Unde sicut ille qui habet Deum, dicitur omnia habere, non quia omnium sit possessor, sed quia habet illud unum, cui non possunt aequiparari omnia; ideo per aequipollentiam vel supervalentiam dicitur *habere omnia*; sic qui novit Deum dicitur *omnia nosse*[^p953-10].

---

english:
### DOUBTS CONCERNING THE TEXT OF THE MASTER.

### Doubt I.

In this part there are doubts concerning the text, and first it is doubted concerning this which he says, that *the joy of the Saints will be greater in the resurrection*. For it seems to be said badly, because the whole joy of the Blessed consists in the vision of God; but the vision of God belongs wholly to the soul, not to the bodies: therefore if the souls are in the state of comprehension and of complete vision, therefore their joy will never be increased.

**I respond:** It must be said that *joy is increased* in two ways: either by *numerosity*, or by *intension*, that is, qualitatively. An increase of joy as regards *numerosity* does not posit an increase in the *essential* reward, because that is in one thing alone, but in the *accidental* reward, which consists in joy over a created good; and that can be increased, most of all as regards the *object*, so that one rejoices then over more things than before. — If we speak *intensively*, then it is not increased except *per accidens*, because the inclination of the soul toward the body, which holds it back, « lest it be borne with its whole intention into the highest heaven[^p951-4] » — that inclination, I say, will be taken away. And thus it is clear how this can be understood in two ways. — Some, however, do not hold it inadmissible that the joy also is *simply* increased then, because the Word of God will be more opened for illuminating, and consequently for delighting[^p951-5].

### Doubt II.

Likewise it is asked concerning this which he says, that *he holds the souls in hidden receptacles*; it is asked, in what sense the receptacles are called hidden.

And it must be said that those receptacles are called *hidden*, not because there are other receptacles of souls now and after the judgment, but because the same ones are now unknown to us, whereas after the judgment and the resurrection they will be known to us. — But if the reason be asked; it must be said that the reason of this is *that faith may have place*, which is of things not seen; whence we merit both in believing paradise and in believing hell, since we do not yet see. *For blessed are they who have not seen and have believed*[^p951-6]. — But it is not only for the merit of faith, but also for *the proving of human affection*; whence the Lord willed that our death should be like the death of beasts, that he might prove the hearts of the sons of men[^p951-7].

### Doubt III.

Likewise it is asked concerning this which he says, that *there is no doubt that the dead are helped by the salutary sacrifice*. For it seems to be said falsely, because the sacrifice of the altar is a Sacrament of the Church; but the Sacraments of the Church do not profit except in the state of the wayfarer: therefore etc. — Likewise, it is asked in connection with this: since the other Sacraments do not profit after death, how is it that this Sacrament of the altar profits?

**I respond:** It must be said that the Sacrament of the altar profits *the living* in one way, *the dead* in another. For to the living it profits under the account of a *Sacrament* and of food, but to the dead it profits under the account of a *sacrifice*. For inasmuch as it is a Sacrament, it feeds and gives grace and perfection to the one eating. But inasmuch as it is a sacrifice, it appeases God; for victims appease[^p951-8]; and since God is angered, not by affection, but by the infliction of punishment:

therefore in appeasing God one does not calm his affection, but causes the harshness of the punishment to be remitted.

As to what is asked, why the other Sacraments do not profit: it must be said that the dispensation of the other Sacraments regards an act upon the person or about the person, as is clear in baptism; and therefore no one can be baptized except him who is at hand to be immersed in water; but a sacrifice is an act *for* a person. And since an act upon a person requires a person actually existing, but an act for a person does not; just as Christ offered himself to the Father for those who have been and who are to be[^p952-1], so the sacrifice profits those who have ended their life.

### Doubt IV.

Likewise it is asked concerning this which he says, that *the poor of Christ have made themselves friends of the mammon of iniquity*. According to this it is objected: because he who loves another and prays for money gives a spiritual thing for a temporal one; and everyone such is a simoniac: therefore etc.

**I respond:** It must be said that mammon is here called earthly possession; from this a man makes the poor his friends, while he comes to the aid of their necessities[^p952-2]; for the poor of Christ are grateful for benefits. And thus it is clear that the temporal benefit is not as a motivating end, but as something inducing; and since they do not principally intend this, therefore they do not pray finally on account of it; and the prayer is not sold, but is obtained *per accidens*, namely through the acquisition of love.

### Doubt V.

Likewise it is asked concerning this which is said, that *it is an injury to pray for a Martyr in the Church*. For it seems to be said badly, because prayers « for the very good are thanksgivings[^p952-3] »; but he who gives thanks for the Saints does not do them an injury: therefore etc. — Likewise, that what it is lawful for us to desire it is lawful also to ask; but we can desire the honor of the Saints: therefore we ought to pray for their honor.

**I respond:** It must be said that Augustine here calls praying for someone praying for his salvation; but no one prays[^p952-4] for that which he already has: if therefore it ought to be settled for us that Martyrs are beatified at once, just as no one ought to doubt about their glory, so no one ought to pray for them. For if he prays, he seems to presume that he was not in glory, and thus that he is not truly a Martyr; and not only to presume, but also outwardly to intimate it, and by this to do an injury to the Martyr.

As to what therefore is objected, that they are thanksgivings; it must be said that this is true when the Church can with probability doubt about someone's salvation.

As to what is objected, that the honor of the Saints is to be desired; it must be said that it is true; but when we ask this, we do not ask it for the Saints themselves[^p952-5], but we ask it for ourselves, that their perfect virtue may become known to us, and that a good affection may be given for the divine praise, or for theirs. — If, however, anyone should contend that this is to pray for a Martyr; it must be said that Augustine does not understand it in this way, but in that way by which to pray for someone is to ask his salvation, or the hastening of his salvation[^p952-6].

### Doubt VI.

Likewise it is asked concerning this which he says: *Nor had he the merits of such great perfection as would not need these suffrages*. For it seems that all are such, because on that text of the second to the Corinthians, chapter eight[^p952-7]: *That their abundance*; the Gloss: « Those who live in this world do not have merits sufficient for life, unless they be helped by the merit of Christ and of the Angels ». — But the contrary seems to be so: because either he has true charity, or not. If not: then he has no merit; if he has: then since he has the Holy Spirit, and thus the pledge of the eternal inheritance[^p952-8], he has sufficiency.

**I respond:** It must be said that there are three kinds of men having charity in this life. For some have perfect charity and absolution from all guilt and punishment, and such suffice for themselves; but these are rather in the heavens than on earth; for the conversation of such is in the heavens[^p952-9]. — Some have perfect love, yet on account of preceding evil works they are bound to punishment; and such need suffrages, not for the obtaining of salvation, but for its hastening. — Some have imperfect charity, so that they are prone to fall and are bound by many liabilities of sins; and such live in this world,

although they do not altogether conform themselves to the world, and they need suffrages, that they may remain in charity, and that, as they go forth from the earth[^p953-1], torments may not detain them.

### Doubt VII.

Likewise concerning this which he says: *That they may in a certain manner offer them to God* etc.; it is asked, in what manner the Angels offer our petitions to God, namely whether on account of themselves, or on account of us.

**I respond:** It must be said that, just as we see in earthly cases, that he who does not know how to speak before the praetor hires an advocate, who may speak and plead for him; so it is to be understood in spiritual matters, that since we know neither how to plead, nay, scarcely even how to stammer before God[^p953-2], the Angel, as an advocate and a great pleader in that supernal court, takes up our word and sets forth our prayer.

But if it is asked in what manner this comes to be; I say that our speaking and our prayer is the desire of some thing, or a petition formed according to desire; and when[^p953-3] our desire is from a pure and true and ardent love, then we cry mightily in the ears of God and then we plead best. And since our affections are tepid, and the affections of the Angels most fervent and more elevated toward him; by desiring for us what we desire, since they approach God more familiarly and more closely, they are said to offer to him; and whereas God saw us first ask and approve through our own mouth, secondly he approves more through the mouth and the desire of the Angels. And since that is said to be *known* which he approves[^p953-4]; hence it is that our petitions are said to become known before God not only through us, but also through the Angels. For the Angels are said to speak to God through the affections of the will and through the support of reason, as Gregory expounds upon the beginning of Job[^p953-5].

### Doubt VIII.

Likewise it is asked concerning this which he says, that *it is good to consult the truth concerning his own works*. For it seems to be said badly: because that counsel implies inquiry, and thus reasoning; but the Angels, as Dionysius says[^p953-6], have a deiform intellect: therefore counsel does not fall in them.

**I respond:** It must be said that to consult someone is twofold: either that through investigation and the discussion of inquiry one may arrive at the knowledge of a doubtful thing; or that through his illumination one may suddenly know how he ought to act[^p953-7]. The first is human, but the second is affirmed to be not only human, but also angelic.

### Doubt IX.

Likewise it is asked concerning this which he says: *That they themselves may learn from God* etc. For it seems to be said badly, because blessed Gregory[^p953-8] says: « What is there that they do not see, who see him who sees all things »?

**I respond:** It must be said that the Angels learn many things either through the Word itself and through other Angels, or through experience[^p953-9]. But what Gregory says is not understood to mean that they see all things, but that they see that one thing which it is better to see than all things. Whence, just as he who has God is said to have all things, not because he is the possessor of all things, but because he has that one thing to which all things cannot be made equal; therefore by equivalence or by surpassing worth he is said *to have all things*; so he who knows God is said *to know all things*[^p953-10].

---

la: Ut dicit August., XII. *de Gen. ad lit.* c. 35. n. 68. Cfr. supra pag. 892, nota 6. — Pro *tota intentione* plures codd. *vel tota intensione*, vel *intentione* (*intensione*), vel *intensive*; Vat. *intensius*. Edd. prosequuntur *quam in illam, aufertur*.

en: As Augustine says, *On Genesis according to the Letter* XII, c. 35, n. 68. Cf. above p. 892, note 6. — For *tota intentione* several codices read *vel tota intensione*, or *intentione* (*intensione*), or *intensive*; the Vatican edition, *intensius*. The editions continue: *quam in illam, aufertur*.

la: Cfr. infra d. 49. p. II. sectio I. a. 1. q. 1, ad quam dist. tam S. Thom. quam Richard. a Med., ponentes idem dub. (hic circa lit.), lectorem revocant.

en: Cf. below d. 49, p. II, section I, a. 1, q. 1, to which distinction both St. Thomas and Richard of Middleton, who pose the same doubt (here concerning the text), refer the reader.

la: Respicitur Eccle. 3, 18. seq., supra pag. 887, nota 2. allegatum. — Idem dub. solvit Richard. a Med., hic circa lit.

en: Reference is made to Ecclesiastes 3:18 f., cited above on p. 887, note 2. — Richard of Middleton resolves the same doubt, here concerning the text.

la: Exod. 29, 33: *Ut sit placabile sacrificium* etc.; Num. 8, 8: *Ut sit placabilis hostia*. — Subinde pro *sed poenae inflictione* edd. *inflictionis*.

en: Exodus 29:33: *That the sacrifice may be appeasing* etc.; Numbers 8:8: *That the victim may be appeasing*. — Immediately after, for *sed poenae inflictione* the editions read *inflictionis*.

la: Cfr. Hebr. 9, 14. seqq. — Idem dub. solvitur a Richard. a Med., hic circa lit.

en: Cf. Hebrews 9:14 ff. — The same doubt is resolved by Richard of Middleton, here concerning the text.

la: Vide August., *Serm.* 41. (alias 18. inter 50 homil.) n. 1. et *Serm.* 113. (alias 35. *de Verbis Domini*) n. 2. seqq. Cfr. etiam Ambros. et Beda in Luc. 16, 9. — Inferius pro *grati sunt* edd. *orant, ut grati suis*. Pro *beneficiis* cod. U *benefactoribus*, pro *temporale* cod. F *recipere*, et pro *motivus* codd. N aa *movens*.

en: See Augustine, *Sermon* 41 (elsewhere 18, among the 50 homilies) n. 1, and *Sermon* 113 (elsewhere 35, *On the Words of the Lord*) n. 2 ff. Cf. also Ambrose and Bede on Luke 16:9. — Below, for *grati sunt* the editions read *orant, ut grati suis*. For *beneficiis* codex U reads *benefactoribus*, for *temporale* codex F *recipere*, and for *motivus* codices N and aa *movens*.

la: Secundum August., hic in lit. Magistri, c. 2. — In fine seq. arg. verbo *debemus* cod. aa secundum contextum bene praemittit *possumus et*.

en: According to Augustine, here in the text of the Master, c. 2. — At the end of the following argument codex aa, in keeping with the context, rightly prefixes *possumus et* to the word *debemus*.

la: Edd. et aliquot codd. omittunt *nullus autem orat*, pro quo cod. F et edd. legunt *pro alicuius salute*, *quam*, *quae*: etiam inferius pro *fuerit... non sit Martyr* substituunt: *sint... non sint Martyres*.

en: The editions and several codices omit *nullus autem orat*, in place of which codex F and the editions read *pro alicuius salute*, *quam*, *quae*: below also, for *fuerit... non sit Martyr* they substitute *sint... non sint Martyres*.

la: Non pauci codd. addunt *scilicet*.

en: Not a few codices add *scilicet*.

la: Cfr. de hoc dubio B. Albert., hic a. 7; S. Thom. et Richard. a Med., hic circa lit.

en: Cf. on this doubt Blessed Albert, here a. 7; St. Thomas and Richard of Middleton, here concerning the text.

la: Vers. 14. — In Glossa, quam referunt Petr. Lombard. (a quo tribuitur Augustino) et Lyranus, textus originalis finem sic exhibet: *nisi iuventur per alios*.

en: Verse 14. — In the Gloss, which Peter Lombard (by whom it is attributed to Augustine) and Lyra report, the original text presents the ending thus: *unless they be helped by others*.

la: Eph. 1, 14: *Qui est pignus hereditatis nostrae*.

en: Ephesians 1:14: *Who is the pledge of our inheritance*.

la: Phil. 3, 20: *Nostra autem conversatio* etc. — Superius in edd. et nonnullis codd. desideratur *in hac vita... caritatem*. Inferius vocibus *sed accelerationem* codd. R T interserunt *ad salutis*.

en: Philippians 3:20: *But our conversation* etc. — Above, in the editions and in some codices, *in hac vita... caritatem* is wanting. Below, codices R and T insert *ad salutis* into the words *sed accelerationem*.

la: Codd. G N Y aa (bb a secunda manu) *de carne*.

en: Codices G, N, Y, aa (and bb by a second hand) read *de carne* [from the flesh].

la: Cfr. tom. III. pag. 175, nota 2. — Superius pro *qui loquatur* (edd. *ut loquatur*) plures codd. *et loquitur*; codd. I K *ut alleget*, omisso *loquatur et*. Inferius pro *et... proponit* edd. *ut... proponat*.

en: Cf. vol. III, p. 175, note 2. — Above, for *qui loquatur* (the editions, *ut loquatur*) several codices read *et loquitur*; codices I and K read *ut alleget*, omitting *loquatur et*. Below, for *et... proponit* the editions read *ut... proponat*.

la: Cod. U addit *petitio nostra et*. Post pauca cod. S voci *affectiones* praemittit *orationes et*.

en: Codex U adds *petitio nostra et*. A little after, codex S prefixes *orationes et* to the word *affectiones*.

la: Vide I. Sent. d. 39. a. 1. q. 2. in corp.

en: See I *Sentences*, d. 39, a. 1, q. 2, in the body.

la: Libr. II. *Moral.* c. 7. n. 10, ubi explicatur Iob 1, 8. Pro *adminiculum* cod. *adiutorium*, cod. S *adinventiones*, cod. A *admirationes* (cod. M *admirationem*), quod magis Gregorio concordat. Cfr. tom. II. pag. 85, nota 2. et pag. 268, nota 3. — Idem dub. solvit Richard. a Med., hic circa lit.

en: *Moralia*, book II, c. 7, n. 10, where Job 1:8 is explained. For *adminiculum* a codex reads *adiutorium*, codex S *adinventiones*, codex A *admirationes* (codex M *admirationem*), which agrees better with Gregory. Cf. vol. II, p. 85, note 2, and p. 268, note 3. — Richard of Middleton resolves the same doubt, here concerning the text.

la: *De Div. Nom.* c. 7. § 2. Cfr. tom. II. pag. 177, nota 5. — Damasc., II. *de Fide orthod.* c. 22: *Deus quippe non deliberat, quia ignorantis est consilium inire* (cfr. tom. I. pag. 714, nota 5.).

en: *On the Divine Names* c. 7, § 2. Cf. vol. II, p. 177, note 5. — Damascene, *On the Orthodox Faith* II, c. 22: *For God does not deliberate, since to enter upon counsel belongs to one who is ignorant* (cf. vol. I, p. 714, note 5).

la: Cfr. I. Sent. d. 6. dub. 5. et III. Sent. d. 35. q. 4. ad 2. — Vide de hoc dubio S. Thom. et Richard. a Med., hic circa lit.

en: Cf. I *Sentences*, d. 6, dub. 5, and III *Sentences*, d. 35, q. 4, ad 2. — See on this doubt St. Thomas and Richard of Middleton, here concerning the text.

la: Libr. II. *Moral.* c. 3. n. 3: *Quid enim de his quae scienda sunt, nesciunt qui scientem omnia sciunt?* Cfr. IV. *Dialog.* c. 33.

en: *Moralia*, book II, c. 3, n. 3: *For what of the things that are to be known do they not know, who know him who knows all things?* Cf. *Dialogues* IV, c. 33.

la: Cfr. II. Sent. d. 3. p. II. a. 2. q. 1. ad 1. et III. Sent. d. 13. a. 2. q. 3. in corp.

en: Cf. II *Sentences*, d. 3, p. II, a. 2, q. 1, ad 1, and III *Sentences*, d. 13, a. 2, q. 3, in the body.

la: Vide II. Sent. d. 11. dub. 2.

en: See II *Sentences*, d. 11, dub. 2. ---

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** Latin re-set from `raw/bonaventure_vol4_raw.txt` L101207–L101427, verified against 450 dpi column bands `/tmp/colcrop/vol4-p95{1,2,3}-{L,R}-{0,1,2}.png`. No bands were regenerated; the existing crops were legible. Running heads verified on the bands: p.951 reads `DIST. XLV. DUBIA.` with folio `951` at the head of the right column, confirming the printed span 951–953 and the `pdf = printed + 20` offset.

**Dubia count — 9, not 3.** The raw OCR exposes only three `DUB.` tokens in a greppable form and out of reading order (I at L101210, III at L101228, II at L101247); the remaining six headers are OCR-cased as `DuB.` and were invisible to a `DUB\.` grep. Band reads confirm the true structure: **Dub. I–IX**, distributed p.951 = I, II, III (III opens in the right column and runs over the page break); p.952 = remainder of III, IV, V, VI; p.953 = remainder of VI, VII, VIII, IX. Dub. IX closes with *omnia nosse* and is immediately followed by `DISTINCTIO XLVI.` — verified visually on `vol4-p953-R-1.png`.

**Boundaries.** Opening boundary taken at the real `DUBIA CIRCA LITTERAM MAGISTRI.` header (L101207), not the `DIST. XLV. DUBIA.` running-head bleed at L101189; L101189–L101206 are the tail of a.3 q.3's replies (ending *Et sic patet illud*³) and are not reproduced here. Closing boundary at L101427; the `DISTINGTIO XLVI. 983` occurrence at L101372 is a running-head bleed (printed p.953's head, folio digit-mangled: printed **953**, OCR `983`) and was correctly read through, not treated as the terminus.

**Apparatus split map — 24 entries.**
- **p.951** (8 footer notes total): notes **1–3 belong to a.3 q.3** (anchors *facere in*¹, *secundum Magistrum*², *Et sic patet illud*³ — the last printed with an OCR-mangled superscript that reads as `8` but is note 3, resolved at band time). Notes **4–8 are claimed here** (Dub. I × 2, Dub. II × 2, Dub. III × 1). This split was determined independently from the bands; the concurrent a.3 q.3 hand-off had not arrived.
- **p.952** (9 notes): all 9 claimed here.
- **p.953** (10 notes): all 10 claimed here.

**Apparatus recovered outside the nominal line range.** The p.953 footer block is *not* inside L101207–L101427. The two-column cascade placed d.46's opening body ahead of it, so notes 1–10 of p.953 sit at **L101441–L101462**, after the `DISTINCTIO XLVI.` header line. All ten were pulled from there and anchor-matched to this chunk's Dub. VI–IX bodies; the `NOTAE AD LIBR. SENTENTIARUM.` block that follows them belongs to Lombard's littera for d.46 and is not claimed here. A naive line-range cut would have silently dropped ten apparatus entries.

**Hand-offs forwarded.** None. This chunk closes d.45; no footer notes carry into d.46.

**Editorial marginalia trimmed** (page furniture, not Bonaventure's text): *Resp.*, *Ratio.*, *Quaestio incidens*, *Notanda distinctio*, *Notandum*, *Ad quaest.*, *Aliter*, *Distinctio*, *Primum/Secundum/Tertium genus*.

**OCR-vs-band disagreements resolved at band time** (not parked as flags): `Angustinus` → *Augustinus*; `nnergi` → *mergi*; `balbutire` (OCR `balbulire`); `sinttales` → *sint tales*; `sufBcientia` → *sufficientia*; `Corinlhios oclavo` → *Corinthios octavo*; `caritalem` → *caritatem*; `Iob` for OCR `lob` throughout; `Dionysius` marker `°` read as superscript 6; `super principium Iob K` → *super principium Iob*⁵.

**`[?]` flags.** None.

**Two apparatus misreads corrected at the d.41–d.50 decade gate (2026-07-21).** Both were logged in an earlier session but deliberately left unfixed pending this gate; both are now confirmed at 600 dpi on the p.953 right-column footer register (PDF p.973) and corrected in the Latin and the English.
- p.953 note 6: the internal cross-reference reads *Cfr. tom. II. pag. 177, nota **5***, not `nota 3`. (The entry's other cross-reference, *tom. I. pag. 714, nota 5*, was already right.)
- p.953 note 7: the Sentences cross-reference reads *III. Sent. d. **35**. q. **4**. ad 2.*, not `d. 33. q. 1. ad 2.` The preceding *I. Sent. d. 6. dub. 5.* was already right.

**No scholion.** Dubia sections carry none; `has_scholion: false` is correct.