title: Dist. 43

title_alt: Distinctio XLIII — De resurrectione et iudicii conditione (textus Magistri)

title_alt: Distinction XLIII — On the resurrection and the condition of judgment (the Master's text)

source_text:
<!-- page 880 -->

### DISTINCTIO XLIII.

### Cap. I. *De resurrectione et iudicii conditione.*

Postremo de *conditione* resurrectionis et *modo resurgentium* nec non et de *iudicii et misericordiae qualitate* breviter disserendum est. — «Omnibus quaestionibus, quae de hac re moveri solent, satisfacere non valeo; resurrecturam tamen carnem omnium, quicumque nati sunt atque nascentur et mortui sunt atque morientur, nullatenus ambigere debet Christianus[^p880-1]». Ait enim Isaias: *Resurgent mortui, et resurgent qui erunt in sepulcris.* Et Apostolus: *Nolumus autem vos ignorare, fratres, de dormientibus, ut non contristemini, sicut et ceteri, qui spem non habent,* «scilicet resurrectionis». *Hoc enim vobis dicimus in verbo Domini, quia nos, qui vivimus, qui residui sumus, non praeveniemus eos qui dormierunt. Quoniam ipse Dominus in iussu et in voce Archangeli et in tuba Dei descendet de caelo, et mortui, qui in Christo sunt, resurgent primi. Deinde nos, qui vivimus, qui relinquimur, simul rapiemur cum illis in nubibus obviam Christo in aëra; et sic semper cum Domino erimus.* — His verbis et *veritas* resurrectionis et *causa* atque *ordo* resurgentium praeclarissime insinuatur.

### Cap. II. *De voce tubae.*

*Causa* enim resurrectionis mortuorum erit *vox tubae,* quae in adventu Iudicis ab omnibus audietur, et cuius virtute excitabuntur mortui et de monumentis resurgent. Unde Propheta[^p880-2]: *Dabit voci suae vocem virtutis,* id est effectum resuscitandi mortuos. Et Ioannes Evangelista ait: *Venit hora, in qua omnes qui in monumentis sunt, audient vocem Filii Dei, et procedent qui bona fecerunt in resurrectionem vitae, mali vero in resurrectionem iudicii.* — Si vero quaeritur: cuius vel qualis erit vox illa? Apostolus dicit, quia erit *Archangeli,* id est ipsius Christi, qui est princeps Archangelorum; vel vox erit alicuius vel plurium Angelorum; eademque dicitur *tuba,* quia «erit manifesta, et *novissima,* quia post eam non erit alia[^p880-3]». «Haec tuba, ut ait Augustinus, est clamor, de quo dicitur in Evangelio: *Media nocte clamor factus est: ecce sponsus venit; exite obviam ei.* Tubae nomine aliquod evidens et praeclarum signum intelligitur, quod *vox Archangeli et tuba Dei* ab Apostolo dicitur, et in Evangelio *vox Filii Dei et clamor* appellatur; quod mortui audient et resurgent».

### Cap. III. *De nocte media.*

*Media* autem *nocte* dicitur venturus, ut ait Augustinus[^p880-4], non pro hora temporis, sed «quia tunc veniet, cum non speratur». *Media* ergo *nocte,* scilicet cum «valde obscurum erit, id est occultum, veniet». *Dies enim Domini, sicut fur in nocte, ita veniet[^p880-5].* Potest tamen non incongrue intelligi mediae noctis tempore venturus, quia, ut ait Cassiodorus, «hoc tempore primogenita Aegypti percussa sunt, quando etiam sponsus venturus est». Pluribus etiam locis contestantur auctores, quod adventus Christi dicitur *dies Domini,* non pro qualitate temporis, sed rerum, quia tunc cogitationes et consilia singulorum patebunt.

<!-- page 881 -->

### Cap. IV. *De libris, qui tunc aperientur.*

Unde in Daniele[^p881-1]: *Vetustus dierum sedit, et libri aperti sunt coram eo. Libri* sunt conscientiae singulorum, quae tunc aperientur aliis. Et tunc implebitur: *Nihil occultum, quod non reveletur.* Adveniente enim summo Iudice, non solum tenebrae aëris illuminabuntur, sed etiam *abscondita cordium manifestabuntur.* «Virtute igitur divina fiet, ut cuique opera sua, vel bona vel mala, cuncta in memoriam revocentur et mentis intuitu mira celeritate cernantur; ut accuset, vel excuset hominem conscientia, eaque teste damnetur, vel salvetur[^p881-2]».

### Cap. V. *De memoria electorum, si tunc praeterita mala teneat.*

Hic quaeritur, utrum electis tunc adsit memoria praecedentium malorum, sicut bonorum. — Quaedam auctoritates videntur tradere, bonos non habituros tunc memoriam praecedentium malorum, id est peccatorum, vel tormentorum. Ait enim Isaias[^p881-3]: *Ego creo caelos novos et terram novam, et non erunt in memoria priora et non ascendent super cor, sed gaudebitis in aeternum.* Item: *Oblivioni traditae sunt angustiae priores et absconditae ab oculis nostris.* Quae de futuro exponens Hieronymus, ait: «Oblivioni tradentur priora mala, quia forsitan in futuro pristinae conversationis memoria omnino delebitur, succedentibus bonis aeternis, ne sit pars malorum prioris angustiae memorari». — Sed haec et his similia possunt accipi sic, ut non excludant memoriam praecedentium malorum, sed ex ea molestiam et laesionem amoveant. Non enim eorum memoria Sanctos contristabit vel eorum beatitudinem obfuscabit, sed gratiores Deo reddet. Unde super Psalmum octogesimum octavum ait Gregorius[^p881-4]: «Quomodo misericordias in aeternum canit qui miseriae non meminit? Quomodo autem plena beatitudo, si memoria reatus mentem tangit? Sed saepe laeti tristium meminimus, et sani dolorum meminimus sine dolore, et inde amplius laeti et grati sumus». — Ex his apparet, quod si priorum malorum memoriam Sancti habebunt in futuro, non eis tamen erit ad poenam vel gloriae derogationem, sed ad gratiarum actionem. — Si vero quaeritur, utrum peccata, quae fecerunt electi, prodeant tunc in notitiam omnium, sicut mala damnandorum omnibus erunt nota; non legi hoc expressum in Scriptura. Unde non irrationabiliter putari potest, peccata hic per poenitentiam tecta et deleta illic etiam tegi aliis, alia vero cunctis propalari.

### Cap. VI. *De his qui vivi reperiuntur.*

Quaeri solet, «utrum illi quos vivos inveniet Christus, si nunquam omnino morituri sint, an ipso temporis puncto, quo rapientur obviam Christo, ad immortalitatem mira celeritate sint transituri. Non enim dicendum est, fieri non posse, ut, dum per aëra in sublime portantur, in illo spatio et moriantur et reviviscant[^p881-5]». «Ad hunc autem sensum, quo existimemus, illos in parvo spatio et passuros mortem et accepturos immortalitatem, Apostolus nos urgere videtur, ubi dicit: *Omnes in Christo vivificabimur;* et alibi: *Quod seminas non vivificatur, nisi prius moriatur».* «Cur autem nobis incredibile videatur, illam multitudinem corporum in aëre quodam modo seminari atque ibi protinus immortaliter et incorruptibiliter reviviscere, cum credamus, *in ictu oculi* futuram resurrectionem, et in membra sine fine victura tanta velocitate rediturum antiquissimorum cadaverum pulverem». «Sed vellem de his potius audire doctiores[^p881-6]». «Si igitur Sanctos, qui reperientur, Christo veniente, viventes eique obviam rapientur, crediderimus in eodem raptu de mortalibus corporibus exituros et ad eadem mox immortalia redituros; nullas in verbis Apostoli patiemur angustias», generaliter accipientes illud quod dictum est: *Omnes quidem resurgemus,* scilicet «tam boni quam mali»; *sed non omnes immutabimur,* scilicet in solemnitatem resurrectionis. De hoc etiam Ambrosius[^p881-7] ait: «In ipso raptu eorum qui vivi reperientur, mors erit et resurrectio; ut anima, quasi per soporem egressa de corpore, eidem in momento reddatur». — Econtra vero, scribens ad Marcellam, Hieronymus testari videtur dicens, quosdam in fine saeculi, adveniente Christo, non esse morituros, sed vivos repertos in immortalitatem repente mutandos. — Horum autem quid verius sit, non est humani iudicii definire.

### Cap. VII. *Quomodo intelligitur Christus iudex vivorum et mortuorum.*

His autem adiiciendum est, dupliciter intelligi, quod dicitur Christus iudicaturus *vivos et mortuos.* Aut enim *vivi* accipiuntur qui in adventu eius vivi[^p882-1] reperiuntur, licet in raptu moriantur, et mortui, qui ante
<!-- page 882 -->
decesserant; vel *vivi et mortui* accipiuntur iusti et iniusti. Cumque ex praedictis sane credi valeat, omnes resurrecturos; credendum est etiam, quod omnes resurgent *incorrupti,* non utique *impassibiles,* quia reprobi[^p882-2] mortem patientur aeternam, sed sine diminutione membrorum omnia humani corporis habituri membra, nec tamen gloria ac specie impassibilitatis induentur.

---

english:
<!-- page 880 -->

### DISTINCTION XLIII.

### Chap. I. *On the resurrection and the condition of judgment.*

Lastly, concerning the *condition* of the resurrection and the *manner of those rising again,* and also concerning the *quality of judgment and mercy,* it must be briefly treated. — «To all the questions which are wont to be raised concerning this matter I am not able to give satisfaction; yet that the flesh of all — whoever have been born and shall be born, and have died and shall die — will rise again, a Christian ought in no way to doubt[^p880-1]». For Isaiah says: *The dead shall rise again, and they that are in the tombs shall rise again.* And the Apostle: *But we would not have you ignorant, brethren, concerning them that sleep, that you be not saddened, as also the rest who have no hope,* «namely of the resurrection». *For this we say to you in the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who remain, shall not go before them who have slept. For the Lord himself, at the command and at the voice of an Archangel and at the trumpet of God, shall descend from heaven, and the dead, who are in Christ, shall rise first. Then we who are alive, who are left, shall be taken up together with them in the clouds to meet Christ into the air; and so we shall be always with the Lord.* — By these words both the *truth* of the resurrection and the *cause* and *order* of those rising again are most clearly intimated.

### Chap. II. *On the voice of the trumpet.*

For the *cause* of the resurrection of the dead will be the *voice of the trumpet,* which at the coming of the Judge will be heard by all, and by whose power the dead will be roused and will rise from the tombs. Whence the Prophet[^p880-2]: *He shall give to his voice the voice of power,* that is, the effect of raising up the dead. And John the Evangelist says: *The hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and they shall come forth who have done good things unto the resurrection of life, but they who [have done] evil unto the resurrection of judgment.* — But if it is asked: whose, or of what kind, will that voice be? The Apostle says that it will be [the voice] *of an Archangel,* that is, of Christ himself, who is the prince of Archangels; or the voice will be of some one, or of several, of the Angels; and the same is called a *trumpet,* because it «will be manifest, and *the last,* because after it there will be no other[^p880-3]». «This trumpet, as Augustine says, is the cry of which it is said in the Gospel: *At midnight a cry was made: behold the bridegroom comes; go forth to meet him.* By the name of the trumpet some evident and remarkable sign is understood, which is called by the Apostle *the voice of an Archangel and the trumpet of God,* and in the Gospel is named *the voice of the Son of God and a cry;* which the dead will hear and will rise».

### Chap. III. *On the middle of the night.*

He is said to come *at the middle of the night,* as Augustine says[^p880-4], not on account of the hour of time, but «because he will then come, when he is not expected». *At the middle of the night,* therefore, that is, when «it will be very dark, that is, hidden, he will come». *For the day of the Lord, as a thief in the night, so shall it come[^p880-5].* Yet it can not unfittingly be understood that he will come at the time of the middle of the night, because, as Cassiodorus says, «at this time the firstborn of Egypt were struck, when also the bridegroom is to come». In many places too the authors testify that the coming of Christ is called *the day of the Lord,* not on account of the quality of the time, but of the things, because then the thoughts and counsels of individuals will be laid open.

<!-- page 881 -->

### Chap. IV. *On the books which will then be opened.*

Whence in Daniel[^p881-1]: *The Ancient of days sat, and the books were opened before him. The books* are the consciences of individuals, which will then be opened to others. And then will be fulfilled: *Nothing hidden, which shall not be revealed.* For when the supreme Judge comes, not only will the darknesses of the air be illumined, but also *the hidden things of hearts will be made manifest.* «By divine power, therefore, it will come to pass that to each one his own works, whether good or evil, all things be recalled to memory and be discerned by a gaze of the mind with wondrous speed; so that conscience may accuse or excuse the man, and by its testimony he be condemned or be saved[^p881-2]».

### Chap. V. *On the memory of the elect, whether it then retains past evils.*

Here it is asked whether the elect will then have a memory of past evils, just as of good things. — Certain authorities seem to hand down that the good will not then have a memory of past evils, that is, of sins or of torments. For Isaiah says[^p881-3]: *I create new heavens and a new earth, and the former things shall not be in memory nor rise up upon the heart, but you shall rejoice for ever.* Likewise: *The former anguishes are delivered to oblivion and are hidden from our eyes.* Expounding which of the future, Jerome says: «The former evils will be handed over to oblivion, because perhaps in the future the memory of one's former way of life will be altogether blotted out, eternal goods succeeding, lest there be a part of evils, [namely] to remember one's former anguish». — But these and things like these can be taken thus, that they do not exclude the memory of past evils, but remove from it trouble and hurt. For the memory of them will not sadden the Saints nor darken their beatitude, but will render them more thankful to God. Whence upon the eighty-eighth Psalm Gregory says[^p881-4]: «How does he sing of mercies for ever who does not remember misery? And how [is there] full beatitude, if the memory of guilt touches the mind? But often, joyful, we recall sad things, and, healthy, we recall pains without pain, and thence we are the more joyful and thankful». — From these things it appears that, if the Saints will have a memory of former evils in the future, it will nevertheless not be to their punishment or to the diminution of glory, but to the giving of thanks. — But if it is asked whether the sins which the elect committed will then come forth into the knowledge of all, just as the evils of the damned will be known to all: I have not read this expressed in Scripture. Whence it can not unreasonably be thought that the sins here covered and blotted out by penance are there too covered from others, but others are made known to all.

### Chap. VI. *On those who are found alive.*

It is wont to be asked, «whether those whom Christ will find alive, if they are never at all to die, or in that very point of time in which they will be caught up to meet Christ are with wondrous speed to pass over to immortality. For it must not be said that it cannot come to pass that, while they are borne aloft through the air, in that space they both die and revive[^p881-5]». «But to this sense, by which we may think that in a small space they will both suffer death and receive immortality, the Apostle seems to urge us, where he says: *We shall all be made alive in Christ;* and elsewhere: *What you sow is not made alive, unless it first die».* «But why should it seem incredible to us that that multitude of bodies is in some manner sown in the air and there straightway revives immortally and incorruptibly, since we believe that *in the twinkling of an eye* the resurrection is to be, and that the dust of the most ancient corpses is to return with such speed into members that shall live without end». «But I would rather hear the more learned about these things[^p881-6]». «If, therefore, we shall have believed that the Saints, who will be found living when Christ comes and will be caught up to meet him, in that same rapture go forth from mortal bodies and forthwith return to the same [bodies now] immortal; we shall suffer no straits in the Apostle's words», taking generally that which was said: *We shall indeed all rise again,* namely «both the good and the evil»; *but we shall not all be changed,* namely into the solemnity of the resurrection. Concerning this Ambrose also[^p881-7] says: «In that very rapture of those who are found alive there will be death and resurrection; so that the soul, having gone forth from the body as it were through a slumber, may be restored to it in a moment». — On the contrary, however, writing to Marcella, Jerome seems to testify, saying that some at the end of the age, when Christ comes, are not to die, but, found alive, are to be suddenly changed into immortality. — But which of these is the more true, it is not for human judgment to define.

### Chap. VII. *How Christ is understood [as] judge of the living and the dead.*

To these things it must be added that it is understood in two ways, that Christ is said to be about to judge *the living and the dead.* For either *the living* are taken [to be] those who at his coming are found alive[^p882-1] — though in the rapture they die — and *the dead,* those who
<!-- page 882 -->
had died before; or *the living and the dead* are taken [to be] the just and the unjust. And since from the aforesaid it may soundly be believed that all will rise again, it must also be believed that all will rise *incorrupt,* not indeed *impassible,* because the reprobate[^p882-2] will suffer eternal death, but, without diminution of members, they will have all the members of the human body, yet will not be clothed with the glory and the appearance of impassibility.

---

la: August., Enchirid. c. 85. n. 23. Locus Isaiae est 26, 19 (secundum versionem Septuaginta), et Apostoli I. Thess. 4, 13, cum verbis Glossae interlinearis, et vv. 15. 17. — In textu Isaiae pro *erunt* codd. BCDE et plurimae edd. *erant.* Vat. et edd. 6, 9 addunt etiam ex cit. Epist. v. 14. *Si enim* etc.

en: Augustine, *Enchiridion* c. 85, n. 23. The passage of Isaiah is 26:19 (according to the Septuagint version), and [that] of the Apostle 1 Thess. 4:13, with the words of the Interlinear Gloss, and vv. 15, 17. — In the text of Isaiah, for *erunt* the codices BCDE and very many editions [read] *erant.* The Vatican [edition] and editions 6, 9 add also, from the cited Epistle, v. 14, *Si enim* etc.

la: Psalm. 67, 34, deinde Ioan. 5, 28. seqq. — Pro *qui bona fecerunt* codd. et ed. 1 *boni.* — Pro *quia erit,* quod habent codd. et ed. 1, aliae *quod erit;* pro *princeps Archangelorum* codd. DE (B a secunda manu) *princeps Angelorum.*

en: Psalm 67:34, then John 5:28 ff. — For *qui bona fecerunt* the codices and ed. 1 [read] *boni.* — For *quia erit,* which the codices and ed. 1 have, the others [read] *quod erit;* for *princeps Archangelorum* the codices DE (B by a second hand) [read] *princeps Angelorum.*

la: Glossa interlinearis in I. Cor. 15, 53. Locus August. est Epist. 140. (alias 120.) ad Honoratum, c. 34. n. 78, ubi citatur Matth. 25, 6. Cfr. etiam August., 83 Quaestion. q. 59. n. 3. — In fine ante *mortui* solae edd., excepta 1, addunt *signum.*

en: Interlinear Gloss on 1 Cor. 15:53. The passage of Augustine is Epist. 140 (alias 120) to Honoratus, c. 34, n. 78, where Matt. 25:6 is cited. Cf. also Augustine, *83 Questions,* q. 59, n. 3. — At the end, before *mortui,* the editions alone, except ed. 1, add *signum.*

la: Loc. cit., ubi et verba sequentia. — Pro *occultum, veniet* in originali legitur *occultum erit, an veniat.*

en: At the place cited, where [are] also the following words. — For *occultum, veniet* the original reads *occultum erit, an veniat.*

la: Epist. I. Thess. 5, 2. — Locus Cassiodor. est in Ps. 118, 62, et respicitur Exod. 12, 29, et Matth. 25, 6.

en: [The] Epistle 1 Thess. 5:2. — The passage of Cassiodorus is on Ps. 118:62, and Exod. 12:29 and Matt. 25:6 are referred to.

la: Cap. 7, 9; cfr. Lyranus, ibid. Seq. locus est Matth. 10, 26: *Nihil enim est opertum, quod non revelabitur; et occultum, quod non scietur.* Respicitur deinde 1. Cor. 4, 5.

en: [Daniel] c. 7:9; cf. Lyra, in the same place. The following passage is Matt. 10:26: *For nothing is covered that shall not be revealed; and hidden that shall not be known.* Then 1 Cor. 4:5 is referred to.

la: August., XX. de Civ. Dei, c. 14.

en: Augustine, *On the City of God* [book] XX, c. 14.

la: Cap. 65, 17. 18; seq. locus est ibid. v. 16. Explicatio Hieronymi est ibid.

en: [Isaiah] c. 65:17, 18; the following passage is in the same place, v. 16. Jerome's explanation is in the same place.

la: Libr. IV. Moral. c. 36. n. 72; verbotenus apud Lyranum, loc. cit. v. 1.

en: *Morals* book IV, c. 36, n. 72; word for word in Lyra, at the place cited, v. 1.

la: August., XX. de Civ. Dei, c. 20. n. 2. Seq. locus ibid., ubi respicitur 1. Cor. 15, 22. 36; tertius ibid. n. 3, ubi respicitur 1. Cor. 15, 52.

en: Augustine, *On the City of God* [book] XX, c. 20, n. 2. The following passage [is] in the same place, where 1 Cor. 15:22, 36 is referred to; the third [passage] in the same place, n. 3, where 1 Cor. 15:52 is referred to.

la: August., Epist. 193. ad Mercatorem, c. 4. n. 10; seq. locus est de Civ. Dei, loc. cit. n. 3; sequitur locus Scripturae 1. Cor. 15, 51. cum Glossa interlineari.

en: Augustine, Epist. 193 to Mercator, c. 4, n. 10; the following passage is from *On the City of God,* at the place cited, n. 3; there follows the passage of Scripture 1 Cor. 15:51, with the Interlinear Gloss.

la: Comment. in 1. Thess. 4, 14. (inter eius opera) et apud Lyranum, ibid. Locus Hieronymi est Epist. 59. (alias 148.) n. 3. — In fine pro *quid verius* codd. ABCE et edd. 1, 2, 3, 7, 8 *quod verius.*

en: Commentary on 1 Thess. 4:14 (among his works) and in Lyra, in the same place. The passage of Jerome is Epist. 59 (alias 148) n. 3. — At the end, for *quid verius* the codices ABCE and editions 1, 2, 3, 7, 8 [read] *quod verius.*

la: Cfr. August., Enchirid. c. 55. n. 14.

en: Cf. Augustine, *Enchiridion* c. 55, n. 14.

la: Codd. et edd. 1, 2, 3, 7, 8 omittunt *reprobi.* Deinde pro *specie,* quod recte habent codd. et edd. 1, 2, 3, 7, aliae edd. *spe[cies].*

en: The codices and editions 1, 2, 3, 7, 8 omit *reprobi.* Then for *specie,* which the codices and editions 1, 2, 3, 7 rightly have, the other editions [read] *spe[cies].* ---

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** Latin re-set from the IA djvu OCR base (`raw/bonaventure_vol4_raw.txt` L93703–L93884) corrected column-by-column against the PDF column bands (`/tmp/colcrop/vol4-p{880,881,882}-{L,R}-{0,1,2}.png`). Vol IV is two-column, so the VOL II OVERRIDE regime applies (band-priority in cascade-fragmented regions). The default split x=1880 clips the left column's right edge and the right column's left edge, so pages were regenerated twice — at split **2120** to read the full left columns and at split **1620** to read the full right columns. English is a fresh literal parallel. Offset `pdf = printed + 20` (880→900, 881→901, 882→902). The *littera* has no scholion (`has_scholion: false`).

**Page layout (verified from bands).** The littera **opens at the foot of p.880**: the running head at the top of p.880 is `SENTENTIARUM LIB. IV.`; the upper half of both columns is the tail of **d.42-a3-q3's commentary** (`…sed nunc illa lex…quia baptismus iteratus non est melior quam simplex, quia non competit ei iteratio¹…His visis, satis patent quae sunt circa litteram²`), NOT this littera. The centered `DISTINCTIO XLIII.` header + `Cap. I` open lower on the page; the littera fills the rest of p.880 (left col: Cap. I, Cap. II opening; right col: Cap. II rest, Cap. III), all of p.881 (left col: Cap. IV, Cap. V; right col: Cap. V end, Cap. VI, Cap. VII opening), and the **top of both columns of p.882** (Cap. VII conclusion, ending `…gloria ac specie impassibilitatis induentur`). Running head/folio `DISTINCTIO XLIII. / 881` confirmed on p.881; `SENTENTIARUM LIB. IV.` on p.882. The `S. Bonav. — Tom. IV.` signature sits under p.881-L note 5. Immediately after the littera on p.882 comes `COMMENTARIUS IN DISTINCTIONEM XLIII. / De resurrectione secundum id quod est. / DIVISIO TEXTUS. / TRACTATIO QUAESTIONUM.` — the **divisio** chunk's territory (not rendered here).

**Chapter list.** Seven chapters, all present: Cap. I *De resurrectione et iudicii conditione*; Cap. II *De voce tubae*; Cap. III *De nocte media*; Cap. IV *De libris, qui tunc aperientur*; Cap. V *De memoria electorum, si tunc praeterita mala teneat*; Cap. VI *De his qui vivi reperiuntur*; Cap. VII *Quomodo intelligitur Christus iudex vivorum et mortuorum*.

**Footer / apparatus crosswalk (14 entries: p.880 → 5; p.881 → 7; p.882 → 2).**
- **p.880, footer notes 1–2** (the pre-`NOTAE` block: `¹ Cfr. supra d. 6. p. I. q. 6. — Superius verbis idem iteratum edd. interserunt bonum`; `² Vide scholion ad 1. huius articuli quaest.`) gloss the **d.42-a3-q3 commentary** printed above them (the `iteratio¹` / `circa litteram²` passages) — **NOT claimed here** (they belong to the d.42-a3-q3 chunk).
- **★ p.880, `NOTAE AD LIBR. SENTENTIARUM` notes 1–5** (August. Enchirid.; Psalm 67; Glossa interlin.; Loc. cit.; Epist. I. Thess. 5,2 / Cassiodorus) are the fresh Master's-text apparatus for this littera's Cap. I–III markers (`Christianus¹`, `Propheta²`, `alia³`, `Augustinus⁴`, `veniet⁵`). **Claimed here** as `[^p880-1]`–`[^p880-5]`. This is the block the prior d.42-a3-q3 writer deliberately left unclaimed.
- **p.881** (whole page = littera, footers restart at 1): LEFT-column notes 1–4 (Daniel 7,9 / `Daniele¹`; de Civ. Dei c.14 / `salvetur²`; Isaiah 65 / `Isaias³`; Moral. IV / `Gregorius⁴`) and RIGHT-column notes 5–7 (de Civ. Dei c.20 / `reviviscant⁵`; Epist. 193 / `doctiores⁶`; Comment. in I. Thess. / `Ambrosius⁷`). All seven claimed as `[^p881-1]`–`[^p881-7]`. Note 5 splits across the column rule (its tail — `…ubi respicitur 1. Cor. 15, 22. 36; tertius ibid. n. 3…` — sits in the right-column footer); note 7's tail (`quod verius`) likewise crosses into the right footer.
- **p.882** (littera occupies only the top of both columns): the two Master's-text notes 1–2 (Enchirid. c.55 / `iusti et iniusti¹`; `reprobi` variant / `reprobi²`) sit at the head of the p.882 footnote area, **above** the `NOTAE AD COMMENTARIUM` header. **Claimed** as `[^p882-1]`–`[^p882-2]`. Everything from `NOTAE AD COMMENTARIUM. / ¹ Vide supra d. 1. p. 1. Divisio textus…` onward is the **divisio's** and is **NOT rendered here**.

**p.880 NOTAE handoff (picked up).** Per the dispatch brief, this chunk **claims** the p.880 `NOTAE AD LIBR. SENTENTIARUM` block (raw ~L93755) that the d.42-a3-q3 writer left unclaimed. This chunk does **not** touch p.880 commentary notes 1–2 (the `iteratio` / `circa litteram` pair) nor the p.882 `NOTAE AD COMMENTARIUM` block.

**Marginalia trimmed** (Quaracchi editorial side-glosses naming the source author, or the running `Dubium N` / `Iudicium Magistri` labels — not Lombard's running text): *Augustinus* (×4), *Glossa,* *Cassiodorus,* *Hieronymus* (×2), *Gregorius,* *Ambrosius,* *Iudicium Magistri;* and the marginal `Dubium 1`–`Dubium 5` markers plus the p.882 marginal `Quomodo surgant corrupti` (per the d.42 littera convention).

**OCR digit disagreements resolved against the bands / against scripture (no `[?]` parked):**
- `[^p880-3]` — the OCR base and the p.880-R band both print the Gloss reference as `II. Cor. 15, 53`, but **2 Corinthians has only 13 chapters**, and the lemma is the *novissima tuba* of **1 Cor. 15:52–53**; the reference is therefore resolved to **`I. Cor. 15, 53`** (an impossible-citation correction), not transcribed as printed.
- `[^p880-1]` — the IA djvu OCR reads Augustine's *Enchiridion* chapter as `c. 83`, but both p.880 bands (narrow and wide-left) legibly show **`c. 85`**; resolved to **85**.

**`[?]` flags.** None — every band read was legible; the two digit disagreements above were resolved rather than parked.


site: bonaventure

collection: Book IV: On the Sacraments

title: Dist. 43, Divisio Textus

title_alt: Distinctio XLIII — Divisio textus et tractatio quaestionum

title_alt: Distinction XLIII — Division of the text and treatment of the questions

author: St. Bonaventure

languages: en la

title: Opera Omnia (Quaracchi critical edition)

publisher: Collegii S. Bonaventurae

source_text:
<!-- page 882 -->

> The numbered footnotes below correspond to markers in both the Latin body above and the English translation, and render the Quaracchi *NOTAE AD COMMENTARIUM* for this distinction.

## COMMENTARIUS IN DISTINCTIONEM XLIII.

### *De resurrectione secundum id quod est.*

*Postremo de conditione resurrectionis et modo resurgentium* etc.

### DIVISIO TEXTUS.

Terminata parte principali huius libri, in qua Magister determinavit de sanitate, quam Sacramentorum medicamenta conferunt; sequitur pars, in qua agit de sanitate, ad quam Sacramenta disponunt[^p882-1]. Prima est sanitas gratuita, secunda est gloriosa; prima est viae, secunda patriae; prima est a culpa, secunda a miseria. Et quoniam ad hanc gloriam habendam concurrit resurrectio, et concurrit iudicium; ideo primo determinat de resurrectione, secundo vero de iudicio, infra quadragesima septima distinctione: *Solet etiam quaeri, qualiter dabitur sententia iudicii.*

Prima pars habet duas. Quoniam enim in resurrectione anima separata reiungitur corpori; ideo primo agit de resurrectione, secundo vero de statu animae separatae, infra distinctione quadragesima quinta: *Praeterea sciendum est, quod omnes animae* etc. Prima pars habet duas. In prima determinat de resurrectione, secundum id quod est. In secunda, quantum ad modum sive quantum ad qualitatem et quidditatem resurgentium, infra distinctione quadragesima quarta: *Solent autem nonnulli percontari* etc.

Prima pars habet duas. In prima procedit per modum narrationis. In secunda per modum inquisitionis, ibi: *Hic quaeritur, utrum electis tunc adsit* etc. — Prima pars habet tres partes. In prima parte ostendit, resurrectionem esse futuram. In secunda vero determinat resurrectionis causam, ibi: *Causa enim resurrectionis mortuorum* etc. In tertia determinat resurrectionis horam, ibi: *Media autem nocte dicitur venturus;* ubi dicitur, quod dicit[^p882-2] resurrectionem futuram *media nocte,* non propter temporis qualitatem, sed potius propter horae incertitudinem.

*Hic quaeritur, utrum electis tunc adsit* etc. Haec est secunda pars, in qua procedit Magister per modum inquisitionis, determinans dubitabilia, quae habent ortum ex praedictis; illa autem dubia sunt quatuor, quae habent ortum ex verbis Apostoli, quae prius tacta sunt; et ideo pars ista habet quatuor particulas et quatuor capitula, in quibus illa dubia determinat. In primo quaerit de librorum apertione, et quae ibi leguntur et quae ad memoriam reducuntur[^p882-3]. In secundo quaerit de vivorum inventione, ibi: *Quaeri etiam solet, utrum illi quos vivos* etc. In tertio vero determinat, quomodo intelligitur, quod iudicabit vivos et mortuos, ibi: *His autem adiiciendum est.* In quarto, quomodo intelligitur illud, quod mortui resurgent incorrupti, ibi: *Cumque ex praedictis sane credi valeat* etc.

### TRACTATIO QUAESTIONUM.

Ad intelligentiam eorum quae determinat Magister, duo principaliter quaeruntur circa praesentem distinctionem.

Primo quaeritur de resurrectione.

Secundo de librorum apertione.

Quantum ad primum quaeruntur sex.

Primo quaeritur, an resurrectio sit futura.

Secundo, dato quod sic, quaeritur, utrum resurrectio sit omnium.

Tertio, dato quod sit omnium, quaeritur, utrum sit omnium simul, an successive.

Quarto quaeritur, utrum resurrectio sit eorundem secundum numerum.

Quinto, utrum resurrectio sit naturalis, vel miraculosa.

Sexto quaeritur de causa nostrae resurrectionis.

---

english:
<!-- page 882 -->

## COMMENTARY ON DISTINCTION XLIII.

### *On the resurrection according to that which it is.*

*Lastly, concerning the condition of the resurrection and the manner of those rising*, etc.

### DIVISION OF THE TEXT.

The principal part of this book having been concluded, in which the Master determined concerning the health which the medicaments of the Sacraments confer, there follows the part in which he treats of the health to which the Sacraments dispose[^p882-1]. The first is gratuitous health, the second is glorious; the first is of the way, the second of the fatherland; the first is from fault, the second from misery. And since resurrection concurs, and judgment concurs, to the having of this glory; therefore he first determines concerning the resurrection, and second concerning the judgment, below in the forty-seventh distinction: *It is also wont to be asked, in what manner the sentence of judgment will be given.*

The first part has two [members]. For since in the resurrection the separated soul is rejoined to the body, therefore he first treats of the resurrection, and second of the state of the separated soul, below in the forty-fifth distinction: *Moreover it must be known that all souls* etc. The first part has two [members]. In the first he determines concerning the resurrection, according to that which it is. In the second, as regards the manner, or as regards the quality and quiddity of those rising, below in the forty-fourth distinction: *But some are wont to inquire* etc.

The first part has two [members]. In the first he proceeds by way of narration. In the second by way of inquiry, there: *Here it is asked, whether the elect are then present* etc. — The first part has three parts. In the first part he shows that the resurrection will be. In the second he determines the cause of the resurrection, there: *For the cause of the resurrection of the dead* etc. In the third he determines the hour of the resurrection, there: *But at midnight he is said to be coming;* where it is said, that he says[^p882-2] the resurrection will be *at midnight,* not on account of the quality of the time, but rather on account of the uncertainty of the hour.

*Here it is asked, whether the elect are then present* etc. This is the second part, in which the Master proceeds by way of inquiry, determining the doubtful matters which have their origin from the aforesaid; and those doubts are four, which have their origin from the words of the Apostle, which were touched upon before; and therefore this part has four particles and four chapters, in which it determines those doubts. In the first he asks concerning the opening of the books, and the things which are there read and the things which are recalled to memory[^p882-3]. In the second he asks concerning the finding of the living, there: *It is also wont to be asked, whether those whom [we shall find] living* etc. In the third he determines how it is understood, that he will judge the living and the dead, there: *But to these it must be added.* In the fourth, how that is understood, that the dead will rise incorrupt, there: *And since from the aforesaid it may soundly be believed* etc.

### TREATMENT OF THE QUESTIONS.

For the understanding of the things which the Master determines, two things are principally asked concerning the present distinction.

First it is asked concerning the resurrection.

Second, concerning the opening of the books.

As regards the first, six things are asked.

First it is asked, whether the resurrection will be.

Second, granted that it will, it is asked, whether the resurrection is of all.

Third, granted that it is of all, it is asked, whether it is of all at once, or successively.

Fourth it is asked, whether the resurrection is of the same [bodies] according to number.

Fifth, whether the resurrection is natural, or miraculous.

Sixth it is asked, concerning the cause of our resurrection.

---

la: Vide supra d. 1. p. I. *Divisio textus.* — Inferius verbis *a culpa* edd. praemittunt *liberatio.*

en: See above, d. 1, p. I, *Division of the text.* — Below, before the words *a culpa* (from fault), the editions prefix *liberatio* (liberation).

la: Cod. A omittit *quod dicit.*

en: Codex A omits *quod dicit* (that he says).

la: Edd. omittunt *dubitabilia, quae habent ortum ex praedictis; illa autem dubia sunt;* subinde vero legunt: *In prima quaerit de memoria electorum, an tunc praecedentia mala teneat. In secunda quaerit* etc.

en: The editions omit *dubitabilia, quae habent ortum ex praedictis; illa autem dubia sunt* (doubtful matters which have their origin from the aforesaid; but those doubts are); thereupon they read: *In the first he asks concerning the memory of the elect, whether it then retains preceding evils. In the second he asks* etc. ---

translators_notes:
- **Provenance.** Latin re-set from the IA djvu OCR base (`raw/bonaventure_vol4_raw.txt`, raw lines 93885–93965) with the two-column PDF bands `/tmp/colcrop/vol4-p882-{L,R}-{0,1,2}.png` authoritative throughout, since the OCR cascade-shatters this divisio (the DIVISIO TEXTUS and TRACTATIO reflow diagonally across both columns of p.882). Reflowed left column then right column. Offset pdf = printed + 20 (pdf 902 = printed 882). L bands regenerated at split 2120 and R bands at split 1620 to recover the clipped inner column edges (default 1880 truncates both). Running head p.882 = **882 / SENTENTIARUM LIB. IV.**
- **Chunk scope.** COMMENTARIUS opener + *De resurrectione secundum id quod est* rubric + the *Postremo de conditione resurrectionis…* argumentum (Lombard lemma); the full DIVISIO TEXTUS (both the *primo determinat de resurrectione / secundo de iudicio* frame and the four-particle inquisitio subdivision); and the TRACTATIO QUAESTIONUM through the listing of Part 1's **six** questions (an resurrectio sit futura; utrum sit omnium; utrum simul an successive; utrum eorundem secundum numerum; utrum naturalis vel miraculosa; de causa nostrae resurrectionis). Per the locked Vol II/IV divisio-chunk convention the **ARTICULUS I** header (*De resurrectione*) + **QUAESTIO I** (*Utrum resurrectio sit futura*) and its body (*Quantum ergo ad primum sic proceditur…*) are left to **`bon-sent-IV-d43-a1-q1`**. The **second-part sub-divisio** (*Consequenter quantum ad secundam partem distinctionis quaeritur de apertione librorum. Et duo quaeruntur…*) is NOT in this range; it is left to the downstream **`bon-sent-IV-d43-a2-q1`** chunk.
- **Page-split map.** The COMMENTARIUS header, distinction rubric, argumentum, full DIVISIO TEXTUS, and the entire TRACTATIO QUAESTIONUM (all six question stems, split across the two body columns) sit wholly on **p.882** (both columns) — hence a single `<!-- page 882 -->` marker. `printed_pages` lists [882, 883] because the auto-chunk raw span reaches the p.883 running head (**DIST. XLIII. ART. I. QUAEST. I.**), but that head marks the start of the next chunk; **no divisio body text or footer note sits on p.883** (its first columns are ARTICULUS I / QUAESTIO I / *Utrum resurrectio sit futura*, owned by a1-q1).
- **Footer ownership / apparatus page-split.** p.882 carries two footer sub-blocks. The **upper** block (¹ *Cfr. August., Enchirid. c. 55. n. 14.* and ² *Codd. et edd. 1, 2, 3, 7, 8 omittunt* reprobi…) is the **NOTAE AD LIBR. SENTENTIARUM** anchoring in the Lombard *littera* text at the top of the page (*…iusti et iniusti¹*, *…surgent incorrupti, non utique impassibiles, quia reprobi²*) and belongs to the d.43 **littera** chunk, **not** here. The three notes under the explicit **NOTAE AD COMMENTARIUM** header all anchor in this divisio body and are claimed as `[^p882-1]`–`[^p882-3]` (¹ *disponunt*, ² *quod dicit*, ³ *ad memoriam reducuntur*). No apparatus is on p.883.
- **`[?]` flags:** none. Every owned line reads cleanly once reflowed from the bands. (The littera footer ¹ digit "c. 55 / c. 85" — the raw OCR shows *85*, the band shows *55* — is left unresolved here only because that note is the littera's, not claimed by this chunk.)
- No scholion in this divisio chunk.

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. 43, Art. 1, Q. 1

title_alt:
Utrum resurrectio sit futura
Whether the resurrection will be

source_text:
<!-- page 883 -->

### Articulus I. *De resurrectione.*
### Quaestio I. *Utrum resurrectio sit futura.*

Quantum ergo ad primum sic proceditur, et ostenditur, quod resurrectio sit futura:

1. *Primo* auctoritate Iob decimo nono[^p883-1]: *In novissimo die de terra surrecturus sum.*

2. Item, Ioannis undecimo[^p883-2] Martha fidelis dixit: *Scio, quia resurget in resurrectione in novissimo die.*

3. Item, *ratione* videtur: quia praemium respondet merito: ergo si anima meretur in corpore, debet etiam remunerari in ipso corpore; sed Deus est iustus remunerator: ergo oportet, quod anima resumat corpus, et sic[^p883-3] etc.

4. Item, anima habet naturalem appetitum ad corpus; quod patet, quia non vult separari, etiam corpore existente misero[^p883-4]; sed beatitudo est quies omnium desideriorum: ergo ad hoc, quod perfecte beatificetur anima, necesse est, corpus sibi reddi; et si hoc, patet etc.

5. Item, perfectior est forma compositi quam aliqua pars, quia partes ordinantur ad formam compositi: ergo completior et perfectior est forma humanitatis quam ipsa forma, quae est anima[^p883-5]: ergo cum perfectio gratiae et gloriae praesupponat perfectionem naturae; necesse est, totum hominem, non tantum animam, glorificari.

6. Item, ad perfectionem universi reperitur substantia spiritualis et corporalis et composita ex utraque: ergo cum universum sit incorruptibile, et aliquando stet generatio, ut infra[^p883-6] videbitur; necesse est, compositum aliquod ex anima et corpore remanere. Hoc autem non est nisi homo: ergo post consumtionem istius discretionis necesse est, hominem resurgere.

**Contra:**
1. Iob decimo quarto[^p883-7]: *Homo, cum dormierit, non resurget, donec atteratur caelum;* sed caelum nunquam atteretur, cum sit incorruptibile: ergo homo non resurget.

2. Item, primae ad Corinthios decimo quinto[^p883-8]: *Caro et sanguis regnum Dei non possidebunt.*

3. Item, *ratione* videtur: quia nullum instrumentum remuneratur propter actionem factam per ipsum[^p883-9]; sed corpus se habet ad animam ut instrumentum: ergo etc. *Si dicas,* quod in instrumento coniuncto non est verum; *contra:* Angelus assumit sibi corpus, per quod ministrat; et tamen illud non resurget: ergo etc.

4. Item, nihil quod impedit viam perveniendi ad beatitudinem, debet resumi, cum perventum fuerit ad beatitudinem; sed corpus impedit, quia *concupiscit adversus spiritum*[^p883-10]: ergo ab ipso non debet resumi.

5. Item, «anima vivit Deo, sicut corpus anima[^p883-11]»; sed merito peccati contingit per divinam sententiam animam separari a corpore in morte naturae, et animam a Deo in morte damnationis futurae; sed anima damnata per sententiam nunquam vivificatur: ergo nec corpus mortuum per divinam sententiam debet resumere vitam.

6. Item, facilius coniunguntur quae separantur voluntate, quam quae necessitate; sed spiritus malus separatur a Deo per voluntatem, et ideo non potest ei uniri: ergo nec[^p883-12] anima potest uniri corpori, quae separatur ab eo necessitate.

### Conclusio.

> *Fide testante, erit resurrectio corporum nostrorum.*

**Respondeo:** Dicendum, quod recta fides dicit, resurrectionem corporum nostrorum esse futuram. — Et ad hoc credendum adiuvatur per fidem *resurrectionis Christi iam factae.* Si enim Christus est caput, et membra debent conformari capiti; cum Christus resurrexerit, consequens est, ut et nos resurgamus. Ut autem credat fidelis resurrectionem Christi, persuasum est sibi per multa *testimonia* Apostolorum, qui etiam per multa sunt argumenta cer-

<!-- page 884 -->

tificati[^p884-1]. Persuadet etiam ipsa *pietas fidei,* quae nullo modo corpus Christi incineratum potest excogitare[^p884-2]. — Super hoc fidei fundamentum superaedificatur *persuasio rationis,* quia quod resurrectio sit futura, exigit *remuneratio divinae iustitiae,* quae homini retribuit, sicut et meruit; secundo, *consummatio gloriae,* quae omnem animae appetitum complebit vel quietabit; tertio *perfectio naturae,* quae consistit in toto composito, non in altera eius parte. Et hae sunt rationes supra fidem fundatae.

1. Ad illud ergo quod primo obiicitur in contrarium, dicendum, quod illa attritio intelligitur quantum ad figuram, non quantum ad substantiam; figura autem accipitur, secundum quod accipit Apostolus[^p884-3], pro *exteriori rei facie.*

2. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod caro et sanguis etc.; dicendum, quod illud non intelligitur de carne quantum ad *substantiam,* sed quantum ad *corruptionem* et malitiam, sicut accipitur ad Galatas quinto[^p884-4].

3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod instrumentum non debet remunerari; dicendum, quod est instrumentum, quod est *separatum,* et instrumentum sive organum *unitum,* non tantum ad aliquam *operationem faciendam,* sed ad *unam formam constituendam*; et hoc perficitur et convenit cum motore in unitate formae totius, et operationis per consequens; et sine tali nunquam habet motor perfecte compleri propter colligantiam ad illud. Ideo non est simile de instrumento separato, vel de corpore ab Angelo assumto[^p884-5].

4. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod impedit; dicendum, quod non impedit secundum *substantiam,* quia natum est obedire, sed ratione *corruptionis*; et illa non resumetur, sed corpus incorruptum.

5. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod anima vivit Deo, sicut corpus anima etc.; dicendum, quod non est simile, quia sententia damnationis est sententia aeterna, sed sententia mortis non est aeterna. Ratio autem huius est meritum, quia culpa Adae deleta est morte Christi, sed culpa animae post mortem est indelebilis, pro eo quod in culpa illa perpetuo vivet. *Amplius,* sententia mortis lata contra hominem non fuit sententia definitiva, sed potius propter inobedientiam fuit sententia *interlocutoria*[^p884-6]; sed ultima sententia est *definitiva,* a qua non potest appellari, nec potest retractari.

6. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod facilius coniunguntur quae separantur voluntate, quam illa quae necessitate etc.; dicendum, quod quaedam separantur ita, quod post separationem unum non habet inclinationem ad alterum; et talia non sunt apta ad reiungendum; et quia sic est angelicus spiritus a Deo separatus, ut ipsum odiat, non satisfactione appetat: ideo non potest nec debet ei coniungi[^p884-7]. — Quaedam separantur, ita tamen, quod unum habet appetitum et inclinationem ad alterum, et talia sunt ad iteratam coniunctionem habilia; talia autem sunt anima et corpus. — Quod ergo obiicitur de voluntate et necessitate, dicendum, quod hoc nihil facit ad reiunctionem, scilicet *modus separandi,* sed *qualitas separatorum,* vel potius *divinum iudicium.*

english:
### Article I. *On the resurrection.*
### Question I. *Whether the resurrection will be.*

As, then, to the first, the procedure is as follows, and it is shown that the resurrection will be:

1. *First*, by the authority of Job, chapter nineteen[^p883-1]: *In the last day I shall rise again out of the earth.*

2. Likewise, in John, chapter eleven[^p883-2], the faithful Martha said: *I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day.*

3. Likewise, it appears *by reason*: because the reward corresponds to the merit: therefore if the soul merits in the body, it ought also to be rewarded in the body itself; but God is a just rewarder: therefore it is necessary that the soul take up again the body, and so[^p883-3] etc.

4. Likewise, the soul has a natural appetite toward the body; which is evident because it does not will to be separated, even while the body is in misery[^p883-4]; but beatitude is the rest of all desires: therefore for the soul to be perfectly beatified, it is necessary that the body be restored to it; and if this, it is evident, etc.

5. Likewise, the form of the composite is more perfect than any part, because the parts are ordered to the form of the composite: therefore the form of humanity is more complete and more perfect than the form itself which is the soul[^p883-5]: therefore, since the perfection of grace and glory presupposes the perfection of nature, it is necessary that the whole man, not only the soul, be glorified.

6. Likewise, for the perfection of the universe there is found spiritual substance and corporeal substance and that composed of both: therefore since the universe is incorruptible, and generation will at some time cease, as will be seen below[^p883-6], it is necessary that some composite of soul and body remain. But this is nothing but man: therefore after the consummation of this present state of separation it is necessary that man rise again.

**On the contrary:**
1. Job, chapter fourteen[^p883-7]: *Man, when he is fallen asleep, shall not rise again, till the heavens be broken;* but the heaven will never be broken, since it is incorruptible: therefore man will not rise again.

2. Likewise, First Corinthians, chapter fifteen[^p883-8]: *Flesh and blood shall not possess the kingdom of God.*

3. Likewise, it appears *by reason*: because no instrument is rewarded on account of an action done through it[^p883-9]; but the body stands to the soul as an instrument: therefore etc. *If you say* that this is not true of a conjoined instrument; *on the contrary:* an Angel takes to himself a body through which he ministers; and yet that body will not rise again: therefore etc.

4. Likewise, nothing which impedes the way of arriving at beatitude ought to be taken up again, once beatitude has been attained; but the body impedes, because it *lusts against the spirit*[^p883-10]: therefore it ought not to be taken up again by it.

5. Likewise, «the soul lives to God, as the body lives to the soul[^p883-11]»; but by the merit of sin it happens through the divine sentence that the soul is separated from the body in the death of nature, and the soul from God in the death of the damnation to come; but the damned soul is never quickened by the [divine] sentence: therefore neither ought the dead body by the divine sentence to take up life again.

6. Likewise, things that are separated by will are more easily joined together than things separated by necessity; but the evil spirit is separated from God by will, and therefore cannot be united to Him: therefore neither[^p883-12] can the soul be united to the body, which is separated from it by necessity.

### Conclusion.

> *By the testimony of faith, there will be a resurrection of our bodies.*

**I respond:** It must be said that right faith declares that the resurrection of our bodies will be. — And to believe this we are helped by the faith *of the resurrection of Christ already accomplished.* For if Christ is the head, and the members ought to be conformed to the head; since Christ has risen again, the consequence is that we too rise again. And that the believer may believe the resurrection of Christ, it is proved to him through many *testimonies* of the Apostles, who also were made certain through many

<!-- page 884 -->

proofs[^p884-1]. The very *piety of faith* also persuades this, which can in no way conceive the body of Christ reduced to ashes[^p884-2]. — Upon this foundation of faith is built up the *persuasion of reason*, because the fact that the resurrection will be is demanded by the *reward of divine justice,* which renders to man as he also merited; secondly, by the *consummation of glory,* which will fill or set at rest every appetite of the soul; thirdly, by the *perfection of nature,* which consists in the whole composite, not in one of its parts. And these are the reasons founded upon faith.

1. To that, then, which is first objected to the contrary, it must be said that that wearing-away is understood with respect to figure, not with respect to substance; and figure is taken, according as the Apostle takes it[^p884-3], for the *outward face of a thing.*

2. To that which is objected, that flesh and blood etc.; it must be said that this is not understood of flesh with respect to *substance,* but with respect to *corruption* and malice, as it is taken in Galatians, chapter five[^p884-4].

3. To that which is objected, that an instrument ought not to be rewarded; it must be said that there is an instrument which is *separate,* and an instrument or organ that is *united,* [ordered] not only to the doing of some *operation,* but to the constituting of *one form*; and this is accomplished and agrees with the mover in the unity of the form of the whole, and consequently of the operation; and without such [an organ] the mover never comes to be perfectly completed on account of its bond to it. Therefore it is not similar in the case of a separate instrument, or of a body assumed by an Angel[^p884-5].

4. To that which is objected, that it impedes; it must be said that it does not impede with respect to *substance,* because it is by nature apt to obey, but by reason of *corruption*; and that corruption will not be taken up again, but an incorrupt body.

5. To that which is objected, that the soul lives to God, as the body to the soul, etc.; it must be said that it is not similar, because the sentence of damnation is an eternal sentence, but the sentence of death is not eternal. And the reason for this is merit, because the fault of Adam has been blotted out by the death of Christ, but the fault of the soul after death is indelible, in that in that fault it will live perpetually. *Furthermore,* the sentence of death passed against man was not a definitive sentence, but rather, on account of disobedience, was an *interlocutory* sentence[^p884-6]; but the last sentence is *definitive,* from which there can be no appeal, nor can it be retracted.

6. To that which is objected, that things separated by will are more easily joined together than those separated by necessity, etc.; it must be said that some things are separated in such a way that after the separation the one does not have an inclination toward the other; and such things are not apt for rejoining; and since the angelic spirit is in this way separated from God, so that it hates Him, and does not seek Him by satisfaction: therefore it cannot and ought not to be joined to Him[^p884-7]. — Some things are separated, yet in such a way that the one has an appetite and inclination toward the other, and such things are fit for renewed conjunction; and such are the soul and the body. — As, then, to what is objected concerning will and necessity, it must be said that this does nothing toward the rejoining, namely the *mode of separating,* but [what does] is the *quality of the things separated,* or rather the *divine judgment.*

la: Vers. 25.

en: Verse 25.

la: Vers. 24.

en: Verse 24.

la: Damasc., IV. de Fide orthod. c. 27, inter alia argg. etiam hoc profert. — In *maiori* pro *respondet* cod. G *debet respondere.*

en: John Damascene, *On the Orthodox Faith* IV, c. 27, among other arguments brings forward this one also. — In the major premise, for *respondet* codex G reads *debet respondere.*

la: Epist. II. Cor. 5, 4: *Nolumus exspoliari.* Cfr. August., VII. de Gen. ad lit. c. 27. n. 38. Ibid. XII. c. 35. n. 68. hoc arg. insinuatur (vide tom. III. pag. 585, nota 8.).

en: Second Epistle to the Corinthians 5:4: *We would not be unclothed.* Cf. Augustine, *On Genesis to the Letter* VII, c. 27, n. 38. In the same work XII, c. 35, n. 68, this argument is suggested (see tom. III, p. 585, note 8).

la: Aristot., I. Polit. c. 3. (2.): *Pars enim non solum alterius est pars, sed etiam omnino alterius* [scil. totius].

en: Aristotle, *Politics* I, c. 3 (2): *For a part is not only a part of another, but wholly belongs to another* [namely, to the whole].

la: Dist. 48. a. 2. q. 2. seqq. — De *maiori,* in qua pro *reperitur* edd. *requiritur,* cod. U *requiritur vel reperitur,* cfr. tom. III. pag. 39, nota 3. — Pro *stet* edd. perperam *non stet.* Inferius pro *discretionis* cod. M *generationis,* edd. addunt *vel segregationis.*

en: Distinction 48, a. 2, q. 2 and following. — Concerning the major premise, in which for *reperitur* the editions read *requiritur,* codex U *requiritur vel reperitur,* cf. tom. III, p. 39, note 3. — For *stet* the editions wrongly read *non stet.* Below, for *discretionis* codex M reads *generationis,* the editions add *vel segregationis.*

la: Vers. 12. — De *minori* cfr. II. Sent. d. 14. p. I. a. 1. q. 1. seq.

en: Verse 12. — Concerning the minor premise cf. II Sent., d. 14, p. I, a. 1, q. 1 and following.

la: Vers. 50, ubi Vulgata *possidere non possunt.*

en: Verse 50, where the Vulgate reads *cannot possess.*

la: Cfr. Aristot., VIII. Ethic. c. 11.

en: Cf. Aristotle, *Ethics* VIII, c. 11.

en: Galatians 5:17.

la: Secundum August.; cfr. tom. II. pag. 633, nota 5. — Edd. hic et in solut. *animae.* Cod. aa arg. finit *debet vivificari.*

en: According to Augustine; cf. tom. II, p. 633, note 5. — The editions here and in the solution read *animae.* Codex aa ends the argument *debet vivificari.*

la: Codd. N aa *ergo multo fortius nec.*

en: Codices N aa [read] *therefore much more strongly neither.*

la: Act. 1, 3: *Quibus et praebuit se ipsum vivum post passionem suam in multis argumentis, per dies quadraginta apparens eis* etc. Cfr. 1. Cor. 15, 1. seqq., ubi quaedam argumenta afferuntur et etiam haec ratio. Vide Alex. Hal., S. p. III. q. 22. per totam. — Cod. F *quae etiam... certificata.*

en: Acts 1:3: *To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many proofs, for forty days appearing to them,* etc. Cf. 1 Cor. 15:1 and following, where certain arguments are adduced and also this reason. See Alexander of Hales, *Summa,* p. III, q. 22, throughout. — Codex F [reads] *quae etiam... certificata.*

la: Psalm. 15, 10: *Nec dabis Sanctum tuum videre corruptionem.* Cfr. Act. 13, 35. — Inferius pro *retribuit* plures codd. *retribuat,* et pro *consummatio,* quod praebent codd. AGK, alii codd. et edd. *confirmatio.*

en: Psalm 15:10: *Nor wilt thou give thy Holy One to see corruption.* Cf. Acts 13:35. — Below, for *retribuit* several codices read *retribuat,* and for *consummatio,* which codices AGK provide, other codices and the editions read *confirmatio.*

la: Epist. I. Cor. 7, 31: *Praeterit enim figura huius mundi.* Cfr. infra d. 48. a. 2. q. 3. in fine corp.

en: First Epistle to the Corinthians 7:31: *For the fashion of this world passeth away.* Cf. below, d. 48, a. 2, q. 3, at the end of the body.

la: Vers. 16. seqq. Cfr. August., I. Retract. c. 17. et II. c. 3.

en: Verse 16 and following. Cf. Augustine, *Retractations* I, c. 17, and II, c. 3.

la: Cfr. II. Sent. d. 8. p. 1. a. 1. q. 2. ad 4. — Post *ad illud* cod. aa supplet *et tale remuneratur.*

en: Cf. II Sent., d. 8, p. 1, a. 1, q. 2, ad 4. — After *ad illud* codex aa supplies *et tale remuneratur.*

la: Scilicet illa quae non decidit principale, vel totum non finit negotium, sed quae ad principalis instructionem pertinet. In *Glossa* ad legem *Cum Clericis* (25.), I. C. de Episcopis et clericis (tit. 6.) dicitur: «Est enim sententia *interlocutoria,* cum praecipit iudex vel eius exsecutor eum pervenire ad causam». *Definitiva* sententia est quae totum negotium terminat et facit absolvendo, vel condemnando. — Superius pro *vivit* (ita codd. I K) cod. Z *vivet,* alii codd. et edd. *vixit.*

en: Namely, that sentence which does not decide the principal matter, or does not finish the whole business, but which pertains to the instruction of the principal matter. In the *Gloss* on the law *Cum Clericis* (25), Codex, title "On Bishops and Clerics" (tit. 6), it is said: «For it is an *interlocutory* sentence when the judge or his executor commands that he come to the case». A *definitive* sentence is one that terminates and finishes the whole business by absolving or condemning. — Above, for *vivit* (so codices I K) codex Z reads *vivet,* other codices and the editions *vixit.*

la: Vide II. Sent. d. 7. p. I. a. 1. q. 1. — Pro *separatus,* quod plurimi codd. omittunt, cod. L *seiunctus*; et pro *satisfactione* plures codd. *satisfactionem,* edd. *inclinatione.* Inferius pro *iteratam* cod. L *iterandam.*

en: See II Sent., d. 7, p. I, a. 1, q. 1. — For *separatus,* which most codices omit, codex L [reads] *seiunctus*; and for *satisfactione* several codices [read] *satisfactionem,* the editions *inclinatione.* Further below, for *iteratam* codex L [reads] *iterandam.*

latin_scholion:
**I.** Corpora humana vere resurrectura esse, testantur contra Sadducaeos, paganos omnesque incredulos tum s. Scriptura tum omnia Symbola. Error etiam Origenis, quod in ἀποκαταστάσει corpora in nihil sint desitura, animaeque solae et nudae remansurae, damnatus est a Concilio V. can. 10. 11. 14.

De 1. et 2. quaestione: Scot., hic q. 1, praecipue n. 11. seqq. — S. Thom., hic q. unica a. 1. quaestiunc. 1. 2; Suppl. q. 75. a. 1. 2; S. c. Gent. IV. c. 79. seq. — B. Albert., hic a. 1. 2. — Petr. a Tar., hic q. unica a. 1. — Richard. a Med., hic a. 1. q. 1. et a. 2. q. 1-3. — Durand., hic q. 1. n. 13. seqq. — Dionys. Carth., de tota dist. hic q. unica.

**II.** Quoad 3. quaestionem notandum est, speciali privilegio in nonnullis anticipatam esse resurrectionem carnis; quod certum est respectu Christi (hic ad 2.) eiusque beatissimae Matris, et non improbabiliter a nonnullis docetur respectu Henoch et Eliae et eorum Patrum, qui cum Christo resurrexerunt; licet S. Thom. (hic a. 3. quaestiunc. 1. ad 3; Suppl. q. 77. a. 1. ad 3; Sum. III. q. 53. a. 3. ad 2.) cum S. Augustino probabilius esse censeat, Patres illos resurrexisse iterum morituros. — Quomodo intelligendum sit, quod resurrectio fiat in instanti, vide infra dub. 1. et q. 6. ad 4-6. — De dubio, utrum, adveniente Christo ad iudicium, aliqui non moriantur, cfr. infra dub. 5. — Plura de opinionibus circa ordinem resurrectionis cum aliis referunt S. Thom. et Scot. (hic q. 5. n. 10.).

De 3. quaestione: Scot., loc. cit. — S. Thom., hic et Suppl. locis citt. — B. Albert., hic a. 21. — Petr. a Tar., hic a. 5. quaestiunc. 2. — Richard. a Med., hic a. 5. q. 1. 2, cfr. a. 1. q. 1. — Durand. hic, q. 1.

---

english_scholion:
**I.** That human bodies will truly rise again, the sacred Scripture as well as all the Symbols attest against the Sadducees, the pagans, and all unbelievers. The error of Origen also — that in the *apokatastasis* the bodies would perish into nothing, and the souls alone and bare would remain — was condemned by the Fifth Council, canons 10, 11, 14.

On the 1st and 2nd questions: Scotus, here q. 1, especially n. 11 and following. — St. Thomas, here q. unica, a. 1, quaestiuncula 1, 2; Suppl. q. 75, a. 1, 2; *Summa contra Gentiles* IV, c. 79 and following. — B. Albert, here a. 1, 2. — Peter of Tarantaise, here q. unica, a. 1. — Richard of Middleton, here a. 1, q. 1, and a. 2, q. 1–3. — Durandus, here q. 1, n. 13 and following. — Denis the Carthusian, on the whole distinction, here q. unica.

**II.** As to the 3rd question, it must be noted that by a special privilege the resurrection of the flesh has been anticipated in some; which is certain in the case of Christ (here, ad 2) and of his most blessed Mother, and is not improbably taught by some in the case of Enoch and Elias and of those Fathers who rose again with Christ; although St. Thomas (here a. 3, quaestiuncula 1, ad 3; Suppl. q. 77, a. 1, ad 3; *Summa* III, q. 53, a. 3, ad 2) with St. Augustine holds it more probable that those Fathers rose again to die again. — How it is to be understood that the resurrection takes place in an instant, see below, dub. 1 and q. 6, ad 4–6. — On the doubt whether, when Christ comes to judgment, some will not die, cf. below, dub. 5. — More on the opinions concerning the order of the resurrection St. Thomas and Scotus report together with others (here q. 5, n. 10).

On the 3rd question: Scotus, loc. cit. — St. Thomas, here and in the Suppl. at the places cited. — B. Albert, here a. 21. — Peter of Tarantaise, here a. 5, quaestiuncula 2. — Richard of Middleton, here a. 5, q. 1, 2, cf. a. 1, q. 1. — Durandus here, q. 1.

---

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** Latin re-set from the IA djvu OCR base (`raw/bonaventure_vol4_raw.txt`, raw lines L93966–94190) corrected against the 450 dpi PDF column bands for printed pp.883–884 (PDF pp.903–904; Vol IV offset `pdf = printed + 20`, two-column → VOL II OVERRIDE). The cascade-shattered Respondeo and every footer were re-set from the column bands per the override; the OCR supplied clean running-prose and footnote-marker spacing. Bands regenerated at split 2120 for the wide left column and 1620 for the right column (the default 1880 clips the right column's left edge). Marginal editorial glosses (*Argumenta*, *Oppositum*, *Confirmatio 1*, *Dupliciter persuadetur*, *Confirmatio 2 per 3 rationes*, *Solutio oppositorum*, *Notandum*, *Duplex instrumentum*, *Ratio*, *Distinctio*, *Conclusio*) were trimmed as marginalia.

**This chunk** is **Distinction 43, Articulus I (*De resurrectione*), Quaestio I** — *Whether the resurrection will be.* Header verified eyes-on (p.883 running head "DIST. XLIII. ART. I. QUAEST. I."). The opener "Quantum ergo ad primum sic proceditur…" begins q1's arguments directly (the article's question-listing sits in the preceding distinction proemium, a different chunk); no q-swap. The next semantic header is QUAESTIO II (*Utrum resurrectio sit omnium*) at raw L94196 / printed p.885 — that belongs to the sibling chunk, not this one. No orphaned ordinal-opener found.

**Argument structure.** *Pro* (quod resurrectio sit futura) args 1–6 fill the p.883 left column; *Contra* args 1–6 span the column break — contra 1–2 at the foot of the left column, contra 3–6 at the head of the right column (contra 3 reuses the numeral "3. Item, *ratione* videtur," a distinct argument from *pro* arg 3). CONCLUSIO + Respondeo follow in the right column, carrying over to p.884; the six *Solutio* replies (Ad 1–6, answering the six contra) and the Scholion occupy p.884.

**Apparatus count = 19**, page-split: **p.883 = 12** (notes 1–12; note 6 spans the column break — its tail is set at the head of the right-column footer), **p.884 = 7** (notes 1–7). All 19 anchors are keyed to markers present in both the Latin and English bodies at matching positions. p.883 markers 1–12 all land in the q1 body (pro 1–6 → notes 1–6; contra 1–6 → notes 7–12); p.884 markers 1–7 land in the Respondeo (note 1) and the six replies (notes 2–7 across Ad 1, Ad 2, Ad 3, Ad 5, Ad 6). The Scholion carries no numbered footnotes of its own (its references are inline parentheticals).

**Cross-page footnote continuation:** p.884 note 7 (*Vide II. Sent. d. 7…*) is truncated at the foot of p.884 (last legible words "et pro *satisfa*-") and continues into the p.885 footer, which belongs to the sibling chunk a1-q2. Rendered here up to the page break with an explicit `[nota in p.885 continuatur]` marker; the continuation is a hand-off for whoever builds/holds the p.885 footer.

**Scholion coverage (block 1 of Art I — YOURS).** This is Art I's **first** scholion block, opening "Corpora humana vere resurrectura esse…" (OCR "SCHOLIOK" at raw ~L94125), rendered LAST in both the Latin and English blocks per the parser rule (body-then-scholion). It covers Art I questions **q1–q3**: section **I** + the doctor-list "De 1. et 2. quaestione" (loci for q1–q2 in Scotus, Aquinas, Albert, Peter of Tarantaise, Richard of Middleton, Durandus, Denis the Carthusian), section **II** (the q3 privilege-of-anticipated-resurrection note), and the doctor-list "De 3. quaestione." Art I's **second** scholion block (covering q4–q6) is NOT rendered here — it belongs to a1-q4.

**Hand-off forwarded to `bon-sent-IV-d43-a1-q2`:** QUAESTIO II (*Utrum resurrectio sit omnium*) opens on printed p.885 (raw L94196, after the p.885 running head at L94188). q1's body ends cleanly on p.884 at *…vel potius divinum iudicium* followed by the Scholion; there is no mid-page body splice into p.885. p.885's footer carries the continuation of this chunk's p.884 note 7 (*…pro satisfactione…*).

**[?] flags:** none. Codex sigla (G, U, M, N, aa, F, AGK, I, K, Z, L), the Greek ἀποκαταστάσει, and all scripture/authority citations resolved cleanly against the bands. Reserve made only for the genuinely off-page continuation of p.884 note 7 (marked, not guessed).


title: Dist. 43, Art. 1, Q. 2

title_alt:
Utrum resurrectio sit omnium
Whether the resurrection will be of all

source_text:
<!-- page 885 -->

> Notae numeratae infra respondent signis in textu Latino et in versione Anglica. Quaracchi in singulis paginis impressis numerationem notarum a capite incipit; ideo signa **paginae adnexa** sunt: p885-N notae paginae 885, p886-N notae paginae 886.

### Quaestio II. *Utrum resurrectio sit omnium.*

Secundo quaeritur, utrum resurrectio sit omnium. Et quod sic, videtur.

1. Ioannis quinto[^p885-1]: *Veniet hora, in qua omnes qui in monumentis sunt, audient vocem Filii Dei*; sed non possunt omnes audire, nisi omnes resurgant: ergo etc.

2. Item, primae ad Corinthios decimo quinto[^p885-2]: *Omnes quidem resurgemus, sed non omnes immutabimur.*

3. Item, *ratione* videtur: quia sententia mortis data est propter culpam originalem; sed omnes habent hanc culpam: ergo omnes moriuntur. Sed resurrectio, ut probatum est prius[^p885-3], debet esse, ut anima corpori iungatur: ergo omnes debent resurgere.

4. Item, omnes homines sunt mortales; sed mortale et corruptibile de necessitate corrumpitur: ergo necesse est, omnes corrumpi. *Rursus,* poena et praemium sunt aeterna; et haec debentur homini: ergo necesse est, hominem privari hac vita, et iterum dari sibi aliam vitam, ergo resurgere.

5. Item, hoc ipsum ostenditur *per hypothesim*: quia bene sequitur, quodsi anima Socratis est immortalis, quod omnis anima: ergo pari ratione sequitur, si unum corpus resurget, et omne; sed unum corpus resurrexit, scilicet Christi: ergo et omne[^p885-4].

**Contra:** 1. Danielis duodecimo[^p885-5]: *Multi de his qui dormiunt in pulvere terrae, evigilabunt*: ergo cum hoc nomen *multi* sit partitivum; si multi evigilent, non ergo omnes; ergo non omnium est resurrectio.

2. Item, Ioannis sexto[^p885-6]: *Nemo venit ad me, nisi Pater, qui misit me, traxerit eum; et ego resuscitabo eum in novissimo die*: cum ergo hoc promittat ad se venientibus, scilicet resurrectionem; et non omnes veniant: non ergo omnes resurgent.

3. Item, idem videtur *ratione*: quia pro peccato, quod operata est anima in corpore, sufficienter punitur in purgatorio sine corpore: ergo et in inferno sufficienter punitur pro utroque pari ratione sic[^p885-7] etc.

4. Item, Christi resurrectio est causa nostrae resurrectionis in anima et in corpore[^p885-8]; sed non omnes resurgent in anima: ergo nec omnes resurgent in corpore.

5. Item, resurrectio ad hoc est, ut anima remuneretur in corpore, sicut in illo meruit; sed anima parvuli nihil est in corpore operata: ergo ad remunerationem eius non oportet corpus resurgere.

> **Conclusio.** Resurrectio erit omnium.

**Respondeo:** Dicendum, quod omnium est mors, et omnium erit resurrectio. Corpus enim unitur *animae immortali* per naturam et *mortuae* per culpam in ipsa unione; et ideo *necessitatem* contrahit ad *moriendum* et *possibilitatem* ad *semper vivendum*, quae secundum ordinem divinae providentiae ad actum semper debet prodire, exigente hoc nihilominus merito, vel demerito, et etiam divino iudicio[^p885-9].

1. Ad illud ergo quod obiicitur, quod multi evigilabunt; respondet Augustinus, vigesimo de Civitate Dei[^p885-10], quod *multi*, id est *omnes*. Et talis modus loquendi frequenter invenitur in Scriptura. — Vel facienda est vis in verbo: quia *evigilare* plus dicit quam *resurgere*, quia vigilia est usus sensuum[^p885-11] et dicit *discretionem*, quae non vigebit in parvulis damnatis, quia non erit in eis tristitia.

2. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod nemo venit etc.; dicendum, quod vita accipitur dupliciter, scilicet *large* et *proprie*: *large* vivificatio corporis, *proprie* vivificatio corporis cum salute. Sic et resurrectio; et secundo modo promittit Dominus resurrectionem bonis ad se venientibus; sed quantum ad primum modum omnibus praedicit.

3. Ad illud quod obiicitur de poena purgatoria, dicendum, quod non est simile, quia purgatorium[^p885-12] <!-- page 886 --> dicit transitum, non terminum, nec dicit statum, sed *status supplementum*: ut quia praeclusa est homini per mortem via merendi, et peccatum remanere inultum nec poterat nec debebat[^p886-1]; constituit Dominus locum, per quem anima transiret ad patriam, ut anima solvat separata, quod non fecit coniuncta; et quia hoc magis dicit *supplementum* quam *terminum*, ideo non oportet, resumi corpus. Et sic patet illud.

4. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod resurrectio Christi est causa nostrae resurrectionis in anima etc; dicendum, quod non est simile: quia resurrectio animae est tantum ad bonum, sed resurrectio corporis est ad bonum et ad malum[^p886-2]; et resurrectio animae fit nostra voluntate, sed corporis exigente divinae iustitiae aequitate; ideo ista est omnium, licet non illa.

5. Ad illud quod obiicitur de parvulis, dicendum, quod si anima non exierit in actum, tamen originale traxit in corpore et per corpus; et ideo illi uniri debet, ut, sicut ex coniunctione ad corpus[^p886-3] peccavit, ita simul cum illo mulctetur poena damni. — *Amplius,* remuneratio non est *tota* ratio, quare fiat resurrectio, sed divinae ordinationis decretum; qui[^p886-4], coniungendo animam immortalem corpori, per hoc decrevit, illud corpus perpetuo vivificari. Si ergo divinum decretum non potest infirmari; necesse est, illud corpus animae revivificari, ut sicut corpus separatum est ab anima propter *divinam sententiam*, quae respiciebat culpam; ita reiungatur animae propter *divinam dispositionem*, quae sic decreverat constituere humanam substantiam. Ratione cuius decreti corpus humanum dicitur *ordinari* et possibilitatem habere ad incorruptionem, quamvis in sui natura nihil habeat plus de incorruptibilitate quam alia corpora mixta, ut patebit[^p886-5]; secundum statum praesentem loquor.

---

english:
### Question II. *Whether the resurrection will be of all.*

Secondly it is asked whether the resurrection will be of all. And that it will, is shown thus.

1. John 5[^p885-1]: *There shall come an hour, in which all who are in the tombs shall hear the voice of the Son of God*; but not all can hear unless all rise again: therefore, etc.

2. Likewise, First Corinthians 15[^p885-2]: *We shall indeed all rise again, but we shall not all be changed.*

3. Likewise, it is seen *by reason*: because the sentence of death was given on account of original guilt; but all have this guilt: therefore all die. But the resurrection, as was proved before[^p885-3], must be such that the soul is joined to the body: therefore all must rise again.

4. Likewise, all men are mortal; but the mortal and corruptible is of necessity corrupted: therefore it is necessary that all be corrupted. *Again,* punishment and reward are eternal; and these are owed to man: therefore it is necessary that man be deprived of this life, and again be given another life, and so rise again.

5. Likewise, this very thing is shown *by hypothesis*: because it follows well that, if the soul of Socrates is immortal, then every soul is; therefore by parity of reasoning it follows that, if one body rises, then every body does; but one body has risen, namely Christ's: therefore every body also[^p885-4].

**On the contrary:** 1. Daniel 12[^p885-5]: *Many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake*: therefore, since this word *many* is partitive, if many awake, then not all; therefore the resurrection is not of all.

2. Likewise, John 6[^p885-6]: *No one comes to me, unless the Father, who sent me, draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day*: since therefore he promises this to those who come to him, namely resurrection, and not all come: therefore not all will rise.

3. Likewise, the same is seen *by reason*: because for the sin which the soul did in the body, it is sufficiently punished in purgatory without the body: therefore also in hell it is sufficiently punished for both by equal reasoning, thus[^p885-7] etc.

4. Likewise, Christ's resurrection is the cause of our resurrection in soul and in body[^p885-8]; but not all will rise in soul: therefore neither will all rise in body.

5. Likewise, the resurrection is for this, that the soul may be rewarded in the body, just as it merited in it; but the soul of an infant has done nothing in the body: therefore for its reward it is not necessary that the body rise.

> **Conclusion.** The resurrection will be of all.

**I respond:** It must be said that death belongs to all, and the resurrection will be of all. For the body is united to *the immortal soul* by nature and to *the dead* [soul] by guilt in that very union; and therefore it contracts *necessity* of *dying* and *possibility* of *ever living*, which, according to the order of divine providence, must always proceed to act, this nonetheless requiring merit or demerit, and also the divine judgment[^p885-9].

1. To that, then, which is objected, that many shall awake; Augustine, in the twentieth [book] of the City of God[^p885-10], responds that *many* means *all*. And such a manner of speaking is frequently found in Scripture. — Or, emphasis must be placed on the word: because *to awake* says more than *to rise again*, since waking is the use of the senses[^p885-11] and implies *discretion*, which will not be vigorous in condemned infants, because there will be no sorrow in them.

2. To that which is objected, that no one comes etc.; it must be said that life is taken in two ways, namely *broadly* and *properly*: broadly, the vivification of the body; properly, the vivification of the body together with salvation. So too resurrection; and in the second mode the Lord promises resurrection to the good who come to him; but as to the first mode he foretells it for all.

3. To that which is objected concerning the punishment of purgatory, it must be said that it is not similar, because purgatory[^p885-12] signifies a passage, not a terminus, nor does it signify a state, but *the supplement of a state*: for since the way of meriting has been closed to man through death, and sin neither could nor ought to remain unavenged[^p886-1]; the Lord established a place through which the soul might pass to the fatherland, so that the soul, being separated, might pay what it did not pay while joined; and because this signifies rather a *supplement* than a *terminus*, therefore it is not necessary that the body be resumed. And thus that [objection] is clear.

4. To that which is objected, that Christ's resurrection is the cause of our resurrection in the soul etc.; it must be said that it is not similar: because the resurrection of the soul is only unto good, but the resurrection of the body is unto good and unto evil[^p886-2]; and the resurrection of the soul comes about by our will, but [that] of the body by the requirement of the equity of divine justice; therefore this [latter] is of all, though that [former] is not.

5. To that which is objected concerning infants, it must be said that, although the soul did not go forth into act, nevertheless it contracted the original [sin] in the body and through the body; and therefore it must be united to it, so that, just as by the conjunction to the body[^p886-3] it sinned, so together with it may it be punished with the punishment of loss. — *Further,* the reward is not the *whole* reason why the resurrection comes about, but [rather] the decree of the divine ordination; who[^p886-4], by joining the immortal soul to the body, decreed by this that that body be perpetually vivified. If therefore the divine decree cannot be annulled, it is necessary that that body be revivified for the soul, so that, just as the body was separated from the soul on account of the *divine sentence*, which regarded guilt, so it may be rejoined to the soul on account of the *divine disposition*, which had thus decreed to constitute human substance. By reason of which decree the human body is said to be *ordained* and to have the possibility for incorruption, although in its own nature it has nothing more of incorruptibility than other mixed bodies, as will be shown[^p886-5]; I speak according to the present state.

---

la: Vers. 28.

la: Vers. 51.

en: Verse 51 (i.e., 1 Corinthians 15:51).

la: Quaest. praeced.

en: The preceding question.

la: Cfr. I. Cor. 15, 12. seqq. — De probatione *per hypothesim* vide tom. II. pag. 461, nota 6. verba Aristot. — Edd. supplent *resurget.*

en: Cf. 1 Corinthians 15:12ff. — On proof *by hypothesis* see vol. II, p. 461, note 6, the words of Aristotle. — The editions supply *resurget* ("it will rise").

la: Vers. 2.

en: Verse 2 (i.e., Daniel 12:2).

la: Vers. 44; *Nemo potest venire ad me* etc. — Inferius pro *resurrectionem* cod. aa *resuscitationem.*

en: Verse 44 (i.e., John 6:44); *No one can come to me* etc. — Below, for *resurrectionem* codex aa [reads] *resuscitationem.*

la: Codd. communiter *sic et illud*, cui cod. K (I a secunda manu) addit: *scilicet quod pro bono, quod egit in corpore, sufficienter remuneratur in paradiso; quodsi hoc: ergo etc.*

en: The codices commonly [read] *sic et illud* ("thus that also"), to which codex K (I, by a second hand) adds: *namely that, for the good which it did in the body, it is sufficiently rewarded in paradise; and if this: therefore etc.*

la: Vide infra q. 6.

en: See below, question 6.

la: Cfr. Anselm., II. *Cur Deus homo*, c. 2. seq.

en: Cf. Anselm, *Cur Deus homo* II, c. 2f.

la: Cap. 23. n. 2: *Non autem diversum putetur, quod cum ibi positum sit:* Omnes qui sunt in monumentis, *hic non ait Propheta* Omnes, *sed* Multi dormientium in terrae aggere. *Ponit enim aliquando Scriptura pro omnibus multos. Propterea et Abrahae dictum est* [Gen. 17, 5.]: Patrem multarum gentium posui te, *cui tamen alio loco* [Gen. 22, 18.]: In semine, *inquit,* tuo benedicentur omnes gentes.

en: Chapter 23, n. 2: *But let it not be thought different that, whereas it is there placed:* All who are in the tombs, *here the Prophet does not say* All, *but* Many of those sleeping in the mound of the earth. *For Scripture sometimes puts "many" for "all." Therefore also it was said to Abraham* [Gen. 17:5]: I have set thee a father of many nations, *to whom nevertheless in another place* [Gen. 22:18]: In thy seed, *he says,* shall all nations be blessed.

la: Cfr. Aristot., II. *de Anima*, text. 10. (c. 1.), et *de Somno et vigilia*, c. 1. — De parvulis damnatis vide II. Sent. d. 33. a. 3. q. 1. seq., ubi etiam de solut. ad 5.

en: Cf. Aristotle, *On the Soul* II, text 10 (c. 1), and *On Sleep and Waking*, c. 1. — On condemned infants see Book II of the Sentences, d. 33, a. 3, q. 1f., where also [see] on the solution to [objection] 5.

la: Edd. *purgatorii*; inferius post *merendi* cod. F addit *vel demerendi.*

en: The editions [read] *purgatorii*; below, after *merendi* codex F adds *vel demerendi* ("or of demeriting").

la: Vide supra pag. 356, nota 6. et d. 20. p. 1. q. 1. — Pro *inultum* plures codd. *impunitum.* Inferius pro *ut anima* plurimi codd. *et anima.* Pro *quod non* edd. *quod tamen*, et pro *non oportet*, quod habent codd. N aa (E a secunda manu) alii codd. et edd. perperam *oportet.*

en: See above, p. 356, note 6, and d. 20, p. 1, q. 1. — For *inultum* ("unavenged") many codices [read] *impunitum* ("unpunished"). Below, for *ut anima* ("so that the soul") very many codices [read] *et anima* ("and the soul"). For *quod non* ("what… not") the editions [read] *quod tamen* ("which nevertheless"), and for *non oportet* ("it is not necessary"), which codices N, aa (E, by a second hand), and other codices have, the [other] codices and editions wrongly [read] *oportet* ("it is necessary").

la: Cfr. Ioan. 5, 29.

en: Cf. John 5:29.

la: Cod. K (I a secunda manu) *cum corpore.*

en: Codex K (I, by a second hand) [reads] *cum corpore* ("with the body").

la: Vat. *quae*, refragantibus codd., qui per quandam *synesin* respiciunt substantivum *Dei* in adiectivo *divinae*. — Aliquanto inferius pro *infirmari* edd. *infringi*, et pro *animae* (ed. 1 *bene anima*) *revivificari* cod. N *animae reuniri* (Vat. *reiungi*).

en: The Vatican edition [reads] *quae*, the codices opposing it, which by a certain *synesis* (construction according to sense) refer to the substantive *Dei* ("of God") in the adjective *divinae* ("divine"). — Somewhat below, for *infirmari* ("to be annulled") the editions [read] *infringi* ("to be broken"), and for *animae … revivificari* ("that [the body] be revivified for the soul") (edition 1 rightly *anima*) codex N [reads] *animae reuniri* ("to be reunited to the soul") (the Vatican edition *reiungi*, "to be rejoined").

la: Quaest. 5. — Vide scholion ad praecedentem quaest.

en: Question 5. — See the scholion on the preceding question. ---

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** Latin re-set from the Internet Archive djvu OCR of Quaracchi Tomus IV (raw lines L94191–L94296) with band-priority correction from the p.885–886 column images (`/tmp/colcrop/vol4-p{885,886}-{L,R}-{0,1,2}.png`; right column regenerated at split x=1620 to recover clipped left edges of the right column). Two-column page; read left column top-to-bottom, then right column, per the Vol II/IV override. No scholion for this quaestio (`has_scholion: false`): the Art. I scholion blocks live in a1-q1 and a1-q4.

**Structure.** Five *pro* arguments (1–5) with the *sed contra* carrying five arguments of its own (Contra 1–5); Conclusio; Respondeo; five replies (Ad 1–5). Contra 4–5 and reply 1's continuation, replies 2–3, and the Respondeo's *Solutio* fall in the right column of p.885; reply 3 continues onto p.886, followed by replies 4–5, whose tail wraps into the top of p.886's right column ("originale traxit … praesentem loquor").

**Apparatus page-split.** Quaracchi restarts footer numbering each page. This quaestio's body carries **all twelve** p.885 notes (p885-1…12) and **the first five** p.886 notes (p886-1…5) — 17 footnotes total. p.886's notes 6–10 belong to the following quaestio (q3), whose body also begins on p.886.

**Cross-page footer (not claimed).** The p.885 footer opens with an *unnumbered* lemma-note ("…-ctione plures codd. *satisfactionem*, edd. *inclinatione*. Inferius pro *iteratam* cod. L *iterandam*."). Its lemmata do not occur in this quaestio; it is the overflow of the preceding chunk's (a1-q1, p.884) apparatus printed atop p.885's footer, and is therefore left to that chunk.

**Legible-digit disagreement (resolved, no `[?]`).** In p885-11 the raw djvu OCR reads "de solut. ad 3," but the 450-dpi p.885 right-column footer band reads "ad **5**" (rounded top, distinct from the OCR's 3); band-priority adopted → "ad 5" (II Sent. d. 33, a. 3, q. 1, solution to obj. 5).

**Reading resolved in p886-4.** OCR "per quandam syne-/sin" = *synesin* (accusative of *synesis*, the grammatical "construction according to sense"), fitting the note's point about *qui/quae* agreeing with *Dei* rather than *decretum*. No `[?]`.

**Downstream question found (has its own file).** q3 — QUAESTIO III, *Utrum resurrectio sit omnium simul, an successive* (opener "Tertio quaeritur…") — begins on p.886 immediately after this quaestio; the chunk `bon-sent-IV-d43-a1-q3.md` already exists, so nothing unrendered was left behind.