title: Pars 6, Cap. 4

title_alt:
De Sacramentorum institutione
On the institution of the Sacraments

source_text:
<!-- page 268 -->

### Capitulum IV. *De Sacramentorum institutione.*

De *institutione* autem Sacramentorum hoc tenendum est, quod septem Sacramenta legis gratiae Christus instituit tanquam *novi testamenti mediator*[^p268-2] et praecipuus lator legis, in qua vocavit ad *promissa* aeterna, dedit *praecepta* dirigentia et instituit *Sacramenta* sanctificantia. — Instituit vero ea in *verbis* et *elementis* ad evidentiam significationis et efficaciam sanctificationis, ita quod semper habent *significantiam* veritatis, sed non semper *efficaciam* curationis, non propter defectum a parte sui, sed a parte suscipientis. — Instituit autem praedicta Sacramenta *diversimode*, quaedam scilicet ex eis *confirmando, approbando* et *consummando*, ut matrimonium et poenitentiam; quaedam autem *insinuando* et *initiando*, ut confirmationem et unctionem extremam; quaedam vero *initiando* et *consummando* et in semetipso *suscipiendo*, ut Sacramentum baptismi, eucharistiae et ordinis. Haec enim tria et plene instituit et etiam primus suscepit[^p268-3].

Ratio autem ad intelligentiam praedictorum haec est: quia principium reparativum nostrum est Christus crucifixus, Verbum scilicet incarnatum, quod quia Verbum est Patri coaequale et consubstantiale, est Verbum summae virtutis, summae veritatis et summae bonitatis, ac per hoc et summae auctoritatis; et ideo ipsius est proprie novum *testamentum* introducere, ipsius etiam est *legem* dare integram et sufficientem secundum exigentiam summae *virtutis* et *veritatis* ac *bonitatis* suae. Ratione igitur summae bonitatis *promissa* proposuit beatificantia; ratione summae veritatis *praecepta* dedit dirigentia; ratione vero summae virtutis *Sacramenta* statuit adminiculantia; ut sic per *Sacramenta* virtus repararetur ad implenda *praecepta* dirigentia, et per *praecepta* directiva perveniretur ad *promissa* aeterna, faciente hoc Verbo aeterno, Christo scilicet Domino, in lege evangelica, in quantum est *via, veritas et vita*[^p268-4].

Rursus, quoniam reparativum principium non solum est Verbum in quantum Verbum, sed etiam in quantum incarnatum[^p268-5], quod, hoc ipso quod incarnatum, omnibus se offert ad notitiam veritatis et omnibus digne accedentibus se exhibet ad gratiam curationis; hinc est, quod tanquam *plenum gratiae et veritatis*[^p268-6] ad maiorem *evidentiam* significandi et *efficaciam* sanctificandi Sacramenta instituit in *elementis* simul et *verbis*, ut, dum *elementa* oculis, et *verba* auribus se offerrent, qui sunt duo sensus maxime cognoscitivi, *evidentiam* darent significationis expressae; deinde etiam *verba* sanctificarent *elementa*, ut plenior fieret *efficacia* curationis humanae, quae quoniam nulli datur repugnanti et impugnanti fontem gratiae interius in corde; ideo sic instituta sunt, ut *significarent* semper et universaliter, non autem *sanctificarent* nisi accedentes digne absque omni fictione[^p268-7].

Postremo, quoniam, etsi Verbum incarnatum sit fons gratiae sacramentalis, *aliqua* tamen gratia sacramentalis fuit *ante incarnationem*, *aliqua* vero non nisi *post Spiritus sancti missionem*, *quaedam* autem *medio modo se habens*; hinc est, quod oportuit, Sacramenta institui *diversimode*. Nam *ante incarnationem* necessaria fuit et compunctio *poenitentialis* et generatio *matrimonialis*; ideo haec duo Sacramenta non de novo instituit, sed iam a se instituta et naturali dictamini quodam modo impressa consummavit et confirmavit in lege evangelica, dum poenitentiam praedicavit et nuptiis interfuit et legem coniugii approbavit, secundum quod colligitur ex diversis Evangelii locis[^p268-8]. — Ante vero *Spiritus
<!-- page 269 -->
sancti missionem* nec fuit plena Spiritus sancti donatio ad *confirmationem* et nominis Christi publicam confessionem, nec *unctio* mentis plenaria ad evolationem; ideo haec duo Sacramenta, scilicet confirmationem et extremam unctionem, Christus solum initiavit et insinuavit, *confirmationem* manum parvulis imponendo et praedicendo discipulos baptizandos Spiritu sancto; *unctionem* vero *extremam* discipulos ad curandum mittendo, qui infirmos *ungebant oleo*, sicut dicitur in Marco[^p269-1]. — *Medio* autem *tempore* et fuit *regeneratio* et Ecclesiae *ordinatio* et spiritualis *cibatio*; ideo Christus haec tria Sacramenta, scilicet baptismi, eucharistiae et ordinis, et complete et clare instituit: primo baptismum suscipiendo, deinde formam dando et ceteris publicando[^p269-2]; ordinem vero, dando primo potestatem ligandi et solvendi peccata humani generis et potestatem conficiendi Sacramentum altaris; eucharistiam vero, comparando se grano frumenti et conficiendo et dando discipulis, imminente passione, Sacramentum corporis et sanguinis sui. — Et ideo haec tria Sacramenta per Christum distincte et integre debuerunt institui et in lege veteri multipliciter figurari tanquam Sacramenta substantialia novi testamenti et propria legislatoris, Verbi scilicet incarnati.

---

english:
### Chapter IV. *On the institution of the Sacraments.*

Concerning the *institution* of the Sacraments, moreover, this must be held: that Christ instituted the seven Sacraments of the law of grace as *the mediator of the new testament*[^p268-2] and the chief bearer of the law, in which law he called to the eternal *promises*, gave directing *precepts*, and instituted sanctifying *Sacraments*. — And he instituted them in *words* and *elements* for the evidence of the signification and the efficacy of the sanctification, in such wise that they always have the *significancy* of truth, but not always the *efficacy* of curing — not on account of a defect on their own part, but on the part of him who receives. — And he instituted the foresaid Sacraments *in diverse manners*: some of them, namely, by *confirming, approving* and *consummating*, as marriage and penance; some, however, by *insinuating* and *initiating*, as confirmation and extreme unction; and some indeed by *initiating* and *consummating* and by *receiving* them in his own person, as the Sacrament of baptism, of the eucharist and of order. For these three he both fully instituted and also was the first to receive[^p268-3].

Now the reason for the understanding of the foresaid is this: since our reparative principle is Christ crucified, the Word namely incarnate, which, because the Word is coequal and consubstantial with the Father, is the Word of highest power, of highest truth and of highest goodness, and through this also of highest authority; and therefore it belongs properly to him to introduce the new *testament*, and to him also it belongs to give a *law* entire and sufficient according to the exigency of his highest *power* and *truth* and *goodness*. By reason, therefore, of his highest goodness he set forth beatifying *promises*; by reason of his highest truth he gave directing *precepts*; by reason indeed of his highest power he established auxiliary *Sacraments*; so that thus through the *Sacraments* strength might be repaired for the fulfilling of the directing *precepts*, and through the directive *precepts* one might come to the eternal *promises* — this being done by that eternal Word, namely Christ the Lord, in the evangelical law, inasmuch as he is *the way, the truth and the life*[^p268-4].

Again, since the reparative principle is not only the Word inasmuch as it is the Word, but also inasmuch as it is incarnate[^p268-5], which, by this very fact that it is incarnate, offers itself to all for the knowledge of truth and exhibits itself to all who approach worthily for the grace of curing; hence it is that, as *full of grace and truth*[^p268-6], he instituted the Sacraments in *elements* together with *words*, for a greater *evidence* of signifying and *efficacy* of sanctifying: so that, while the *elements* offered themselves to the eyes and the *words* to the ears — which are the two senses most apt for knowing — they might give an evidence of express signification; and then also that the *words* might sanctify the *elements*, so that the *efficacy* of human curing might be made fuller; which curing, since it is given to no one who resists and assails the fount of grace inwardly in the heart, they were therefore so instituted that they should *signify* always and universally, but should not *sanctify* save those who approach worthily without any feigning[^p268-7].

Lastly, since, although the Word incarnate is the fount of sacramental grace, *some* sacramental grace nevertheless was *before the incarnation*, *some* indeed not save *after the mission of the Holy Spirit*, and *some* holding *a middle manner*; hence it is that it behoved the Sacraments to be instituted *in diverse manners*. For *before the incarnation* both *penitential* compunction and *matrimonial* generation were necessary; therefore these two Sacraments he did not institute anew, but, as already instituted by himself and in a certain manner impressed upon the natural dictate, he consummated and confirmed them in the evangelical law, when he preached penance and was present at the nuptials and approved the law of wedlock, according as is gathered from diverse places of the Gospel[^p268-8]. — But before
<!-- page 269 -->
*the mission of the Holy Spirit* there was neither a full giving of the Holy Spirit for *confirmation* and the public confession of Christ's name, nor a plenary *anointing* of the mind for the flight upward; therefore these two Sacraments, namely confirmation and extreme unction, Christ only initiated and insinuated: *confirmation*, by laying his hand upon little ones and by foretelling that the disciples would be baptized with the Holy Spirit; *extreme unction* indeed, by sending the disciples out to heal, who *anointed the sick with oil*, as is said in Mark[^p269-1]. — In the *middle time*, moreover, there was both *regeneration* and the *ordination* of the Church and spiritual *feeding*; therefore Christ instituted these three Sacraments, namely of baptism, of the eucharist and of order, both completely and clearly: baptism, first by receiving it, then by giving its form and by publishing it to the rest[^p269-2]; order indeed, by giving first the power of binding and loosing the sins of the human race and the power of confecting the Sacrament of the altar; the eucharist indeed, by comparing himself to the grain of wheat and by confecting and giving to the disciples, with his passion imminent, the Sacrament of his own body and blood. — And therefore these three Sacraments had to be instituted by Christ distinctly and entirely and to be figured in manifold ways in the old law, as the substantial Sacraments of the new testament and proper to the lawgiver, namely the Word incarnate.

---

la: Hebr. 9, 15. — Inferius pro *Instituit vero* S *Instituit enim*.

en: Hebr. 9, 15. — Below, for *Instituit vero*, S reads *Instituit enim*.

la: Cfr. IV. Sent. d. 3. p. II. a. 1. q. 1; d. 7. a. 1. q. 1. seq.; d. 8. p. I. a. 2. q. 1-3. et dub. 4; d. 17. p. II. a. 1. q. 1-3; d. 23. a. 1. q. 2; d. XXIV. lit. Magistri, c. 1, et Comment. p. I. a. 2. q. 2. seq.; d. 26. a. 1. q. 1. seq. — Pro *plene instituit* multi codd. et 2 *plene statuit*.

en: Cf. IV Sent. d. 3, p. II, a. 1, q. 1; d. 7, a. 1, q. 1 seq.; d. 8, p. I, a. 2, q. 1–3, and dub. 4; d. 17, p. II, a. 1, q. 1–3; d. 23, a. 1, q. 2; d. XXIV, the Master's text, c. 1, and the Commentary, p. I, a. 2, q. 2 seq.; d. 26, a. 1, q. 1 seq. — For *plene instituit* many codices and edition 2 read *plene statuit*.

la: Ioan. 14, 6. — Superius pro *beatificantia* A S *beneficia*. Subinde pro *repararetur* 2 cum pluribus codd. *reparetur*, et E *perveniatur* pro *perveniretur*.

en: John 14, 6. — Above, for *beatificantia*, A S read *beneficia*. Then for *repararetur*, edition 2 with several codices reads *reparetur*, and E *perveniatur* for *perveniretur*.

la: Sensus videtur requirere, ut verba ita construantur: quoniam Verbum est reparativum principium non solum in quantum Verbum, sed etiam etc. Tamen codd. et edd. eandem positionem verborum habent, quam retinuimus.

en: The sense seems to require that the words be construed thus: since the Word is the reparative principle not only inasmuch as it is the Word, but also, etc. Nevertheless the codices and the editions have the same disposition of the words, which we have retained.

la: Ioan. 1, 14. — De duobus sensibus maxime cognoscitivis cfr. tom. III. pag. 529, nota 9. et 10. — Superius post *se offert* Vat., 1 et 3 addunt *quantum*.

en: John 1, 14. — On the two senses most apt for knowing cf. tom. III, p. 529, notes 9 and 10. — Above, after *se offert*, the Vatican codex and editions 1 and 3 add *quantum*.

la: Cfr. IV. Sent. d. 1. p. I. q. 2. et d. 4. p. I. a. 2. q. 2. seq.

en: Cf. IV Sent. d. 1, p. I, q. 2, and d. 4, p. I, a. 2, q. 2 seq.

en: Matt. 4, 17, and Mark 1, 14 seq. — John 2, 1 seqq. — Matt. 19, 4 seqq.

la: Cap. 6, 13. — Ibid. 10, 13; Matth. 19, 13. et Luc. 18, 15. dicitur, quod parvuli sunt ei oblati, ut manus eis imponeret sive tangeret illos. Act. 1, 5: Vos autem baptizabimini Spiritu sancto etc. — Superius verbis *confirmationem manum* I K L O V interserunt *siquidem*. Subinde pro *discipulos baptizandos* A E H Z *discipulis eos baptizandos*, I K L M O U V *discipulis baptizandis*.

en: Chapter 6, 13. — Ibid. 10, 13; Matt. 19, 13, and Luke 18, 15 it is said that little ones were brought to him, that he might lay his hands upon them or touch them. Acts 1, 5: "But you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit," etc. — Above, into the words *confirmationem manum*, I K L O V insert *siquidem*. Then for *discipulos baptizandos* A E H Z read *discipulis eos baptizandos*, and I K L M O U V *discipulis baptizandis*.

la: Matth. 3, 13; 28, 19; Marc. 16, 15. et Ioan. 3, 5. — De ordine cfr. Ioan. 20, 22. seq.; Luc. 22, 19. et I. Cor. 11, 24. seq.; ubi etiam de eucharistia. Ioan. 12, 24. seq.: Nisi granum frumenti etc. — Inferius pro *primo* H P W *Petro* (Matth. 18, 18.). Subinde plurimi codd. et 2 omittunt *discipulis*, et post *distincte* I K L addunt *et aperte*.

en: Matt. 3, 13; 28, 19; Mark 16, 15, and John 3, 5. — On order cf. John 20, 22 seq.; Luke 22, 19, and I Cor. 11, 24 seq., where also on the eucharist. John 12, 24 seq.: "Unless the grain of wheat," etc. — Below, for *primo*, H P W read *Petro* (Matt. 18, 18). Then very many codices and edition 2 omit *discipulis*, and after *distincte* I K L add *et aperte*. ---

translators_notes:
**★★ PAGE SPAN — pp. 268–269, AND BOTH ENDS ARE FIXED POSITIVELY FROM HEADINGS.** `Cap. IV.` with the **ONE-line** subtitle `De Sacramentorum institutione.` stands centred in p. 268's LEFT column about **45 %** down the leaf, immediately below Cap. III's closing `…patet ex his sufficientia et ordo medicamentorum sacramentalium et armorum.` — where `bon-brev-p6-c3` said it stood, and re-set here line by line off the band rather than adopted. Cap. IV fills the rest of p. 268's left column to `…ac per hoc et summae auctorita-`; crosses p. 268's gutter **MID-WORD AND HYPHENATED** (`auctorita-` / `tis; et ideo ipsius est proprie novum testamentum`); fills p. 268's right column entire to `— Ante vero *Spiritus*`; breaks across the leaf **INSIDE AN ITALICISED FORMULA, between a noun and its dependent genitive** (`Ante vero *Spiritus` / `sancti missionem*`), neither half readable alone; and closes about **42 % down p. 269's LEFT column** at `…tanquam Sacramenta substantialia novi testamenti et propria legislatoris, Verbi scilicet incarnati.`

**★★ THE CLOSE IS ESTABLISHED FROM THE `Cap. V.` HEADING AND FROM NOTHING ELSE.** `Cap. V.` with the ONE-line subtitle `De Sacramentorum dispensatione.` stands centred in p. 269's LEFT column immediately below Cap. IV's last line, with the opening of Cap. V beneath it in the same column (`De *dispensatione* autem Sacramentorum hoc tenendum est, quod potestas dispensationis Sacramentorum regulariter spectat ad solum genus humanum…`) beside a fresh `Thesis 1.` gloss. **The volume index's "Cap. V on p. 269" and p. 269's running head `PARS VI. C. V.` were BOTH hypotheses on arrival; the heading on the band is what closes Cap. IV, and the running head was used for nothing.** No inference was drawn from white space at any column foot, and the grammatically complete tail (`…Verbi scilicet incarnati.`) was not treated as evidence of anything.

**Gutters — one re-derived from scratch, one settled fresh with no constant.**
- **p. 268 = 1370, RE-DERIVED rather than re-used.** `colcrop.py vol5 268` with no constant returns **1374 on a 49 px run**, inside the suspect band, so the three-step method was run again from the beginning rather than the inherited figure adopted. Step 2 forks exactly as the predecessor reported: 15–35 % → 1270/**273 px** · 20–40 % → 1300/**208 px** · 25–45 % → 1335/**138 px** · 30–50 % → 1405/**129 px** · 45–65 % → 1410/**141 px** all blow out on the `Cap. IV.` heading and its subtitle set mid-left-column, and the survivors (35–55 % → 1377/74 · 40–60 % → 1377/75 · 50–70 % → 1371/64 · 55–75 % → 1376/54 · 60–80 % → 1375/52 · 65–85 % → 1375/51) decay to 51 px, the quiet-failure profile. **Step 3 decides it, and reproduced the predecessor's numbers digit for digit on an independent profiling run:** over rows 35–85 % the left column's ink dies at x = 1340 (x = 1341–1349 carry 2 rows out of 1911, a speck) and the right column's resumes at x = 1401, so the near-zero band is **x = 1341–1400**; Quaracchi's printed **column rule is inked at x = 1367–1373, peaking 176 rows on x = 1369** with a second peak of 151 on x = 1372. **Band midpoint 1370, adopted**, bands regenerated at 1370 and read clean edge to edge. That two independent passes reached the same band edges is the check; the value was not taken on trust.
- **★★ p. 269 = 1186, SETTLED FRESH.** `colcrop.py vol5 269` with no constant returns **1185 on a 59 px run** — one pixel below the 60 px trust floor, so the sweep was run in full. Five windows blow out and are discarded (20–40 % → 1241/**169 px** · 35–55 % → 1294/**394 px** · 40–60 % → 1273/**235 px** · 55–75 % → 1300/**290 px** · 60–80 % → 1322/**336 px**), all of them landing on the `Cap. V.` heading, its subtitle, or the short right-column footer; the six survivors agree tightly — 15–35 % → 1188/64 · 25–45 % → 1188/64 · 30–50 % → 1188/64 · 45–65 % → 1187/64 · 50–70 % → 1187/64 · 65–85 % → 1185/61 — **a 3 px spread on runs of 61–64 px**, the trustworthy profile. The per-column ink profile confirms why: over rows 35–85 % the left column's ink dies at x = 1155 and the right column's resumes at x = 1216, so the near-zero band is **x = 1156–1215 (60 px)**, and the column rule stands inside it at **x = 1183–1189, peaking 767 rows on x = 1186** — one of the most heavily inked rules met in this run, which is why the default's zero-ink run was pinched to 59 px. **Band midpoint 1185.5, rule centre 1186 — the rule is centred, and 1186 is adopted.** Bands regenerated at 1186 and read clean edge to edge.

**Apparatus source.** Vol V's IA OCR renders footnote numerals as punctuation glyphs — anchor POSITIONS survive in the raw, numbers and footer-entry openers do NOT. **All nine notes here were read off the 450 dpi footer bands**; the counts are band-derived. `audit-apparatus-count` is blind to Vol V; `tools/check-vol5-apparatus.py` is the instrument, and **p. 268's total of 8 is established here and entered into its `KNOWN_TOTALS`** (`bon-brev-p6-c3` deliberately did not enter it, having read only n. 1 and never having read p. 268's right block at all).

**★★ THE INCOMING HAND-OFF WAS RE-DERIVED IN FULL, AND ITS SCOPE STATEMENT HELD — BUT IT WAS INCOMPLETE IN ONE MATERIAL RESPECT THAT IT HAD CORRECTLY DECLARED.** `bon-brev-p6-c3` forwarded p. 268 from n. 2 onward and stated its verification level precisely: **BLOCK POSITION and VERBATIM TEXT of nn. 2–4 read off the LEFT block, which ends complete at n. 4; NO anchor read for any of them and none claimed; the RIGHT block NOT read at all; p. 268's total UNKNOWN.** Every clause of that is correct, the verbatim text of nn. 2–4 is confirmed word for word, and every digit and siglum it flagged as unverified re-derived to the same reading. **The one thing the predecessor's phrasing could have misled a careless successor into believing, and explicitly did not assert, is that n. 4 is finished where the left block stops: it is not.** n. 4 ends the left block with a full stop (`…A S *beneficia*.`) and then **continues, unnumbered, at the head of the right block** (`Subinde pro *repararetur* 2 cum pluribus codd. *reparetur*, et E *perveniatur* pro *perveniretur*.`) — a gutter runover that a "left block ends COMPLETE" reading would have missed. Rendered joined in `p268-4`. **This is the apparatus-level form of the frozen rule that a grammatically complete tail is not evidence a unit ended.** Verification level of every note as established **here**:
- **p. 268 n. 2** — POSITION, COLUMN and OWNERSHIP all verified here; the hand-off claimed no anchor and this one is first-read. Anchors on `tanquam *novi testamenti media-tor* ²` in the **LEFT** column, in Cap. IV's opening thesis, beside the `Thesis 1.` gloss. Footer entry second in the left block.
- **p. 268 n. 3** — POSITION, COLUMN and OWNERSHIP all verified here, first-read. Anchors on `et etiam primus suscepit ³.` in the **LEFT** column, closing *Thesis 3*. Footer entry third in the left block.
- **p. 268 n. 4** — POSITION, COLUMN and OWNERSHIP all verified here, first-read. Anchors on `in quantum est *via, veritas et vita* ⁴.` in the **RIGHT** column, closing the *Pro thesi 1.* period. Footer entry last in the left block, **breaking off after a completed sentence and continuing unnumbered at the head of the right block** (above).
- **p. 268 n. 5** — first-read here. POSITION, COLUMN and OWNERSHIP all verified: anchors on `sed etiam in quantum incarnatum ⁵,` in the **RIGHT** column, three lines into the *Pro thesi 2.* paragraph. Footer entry second in the right block.
- **p. 268 n. 6** — first-read here. POSITION, COLUMN and OWNERSHIP all verified: anchors on `tanquam *plenum gratiae et veritatis* ⁶` in the **RIGHT** column. Footer entry third in the right block.
- **p. 268 n. 7** — first-read here. POSITION, COLUMN and OWNERSHIP all verified: anchors on `digne absque omni fictione ⁷.` in the **RIGHT** column, closing the *Pro thesi 2.* paragraph. Footer entry fourth in the right block.
- **p. 268 n. 8** — first-read here. POSITION, COLUMN and OWNERSHIP all verified: anchors on `colligitur ex diversis Evangelii locis ⁸.` in the **RIGHT** column, inside the *Pro thesi 3.* paragraph. Footer entry last in the right block and complete.
- **p. 269 n. 1** — first-read here. POSITION, COLUMN and OWNERSHIP all verified: anchors on `sicut dicitur in Marco ¹.` in p. 269's **LEFT** column, still inside Cap. IV's *Pro thesi 3.* period. Footer entry opens p. 269's left block, NUMBERED.
- **p. 269 n. 2** — first-read here. POSITION, COLUMN and OWNERSHIP all verified: anchors on `deinde formam dando et ceteris publicando ²;` in p. 269's **LEFT** column. Footer entry second in the left block.

**★ p. 268's SPLIT MAP — THE BLOCK SPLIT IS 4/4, THE ANCHOR SPLIT IS 3/5, AND THEY DO NOT COINCIDE.** Left footer block: nn. 1, 2, 3, 4 (n. 4 breaking off mid-entry). Right footer block: n. 4's unnumbered continuation, then nn. 5, 6, 7, 8. **Anchors:** nn. 1–3 in the left column, nn. 4–8 in the right — n. 4 straddles, with its entry begun in the left block and its anchor in the right column. **p. 268's TOTAL IS 8.** ★ **This is not the 4/4-against-4/4 coincidence p. 267 showed one leaf back, and the frozen rule that block structure, column structure and capitulum structure are three independent things is what the two leaves together demonstrate** — the same 4/4 block shape sits over a 4/4 anchor split on p. 267 and over a 3/5 anchor split here. **p. 269's SPLIT MAP is deliberately not stated: only its left block was read here** (nn. 1–4, the block breaking off inside n. 4 at `…ubi de in-`), **and p. 269's total is left UNKNOWN and NOT fed to `KNOWN_TOTALS`.**

**★★ SIGLA — SIX RUNS, ALL SETTLED BY STROKE COUNT, ALPHABETICAL ASCENT AND GRAMMATICAL SLOT.**
1. **`S` (p. 268 n. 2, alone)** — a single unambiguous sort in the codex-siglum slot governing *Instituit enim*.
2. **`A S` (p. 268 n. 4)** — two single sorts, ascending, governing *beneficia*; `A` is unmistakable and `S` is the same sort as in n. 2 on the same leaf.
3. **`E` (p. 268 n. 4's continuation)** — a single sort governing *perveniatur*, standing beside the edition-siglum `2` in the same clause. ★ **The edition siglum `2` and the codex sigla print as different sorts in one clause here**, the pattern the frozen rule names.
4. **`I K L O V` (p. 269 n. 1, first run)** — the first glyph is a **single** upright with head and foot serifs, therefore `I` by the one-upright rule and never a flattened `H`; the run is strictly ascending, which excludes the volume's chronic raw `R` for `K`. The same run stood as `I L O V` in p. 268 n. 1 one column back, with `K` named separately there.
5. **`A E H Z` and `I K L M O U V` (p. 269 n. 1, second and third runs)** — **`H` here is TWO uprights with no crossbar**, the typeface fact rather than an OCR artifact, and it is admitted only because two uprights can be a crossbar-less `H` where one never can, and because `A E H Z` ascends and `A E II Z` would not be a siglum run at all. `I K L M O U V` likewise ascends and its leading glyph is a single upright.
6. **`H P W` (p. 269 n. 2)** — two uprights, then `P`, then an unmistakable double-V; `H P W` ascends, and reading the first glyph as `II` would break both the ascent and the stroke count. `I K L` in the same note's last clause is a third ascending run on the same leaf.

**Digits settled off the band, each with something independent agreeing** (per the frozen rule). The `1`/`4` discriminator — a **`4` printing with a crossbar and open triangular top** against a **`1` as a bare flagged stem** — was re-applied at 3.0–3.2× on both leaves, and **the `1`/`4` class dominates here**, exactly reversing p. 267's `3`/`5` bias one leaf back, which is the leaf-to-leaf swing the rule warns about:
- **p. 268 n. 3's `d. 3 … d. 26` chain — the densest `1`/`4` concentration in Pars VI, and it was settled by checking that EVERY locus in it exists.** Per the frozen inheritance rule a chain states `Sent.` once and then lists distinctions bare, so all seven loci are live targets: `d. 3. p. II. a. 1. q. 1` → `bon-sent-IV-d3-p2-a1-q1` ✓ · `d. 7. a. 1. q. 1. seq.` → `d7-a1-q1` ✓ · `d. 8. p. I. a. 2. q. 1-3. et dub. 4` → `d8-p1-a2-q1`, `-q2`, `-q3` and `d8-p1-dubia` ✓ · `d. 17. p. II. a. 1. q. 1-3` → `d17-p2-a1-q1`, `-q2`, `-q3` ✓ · `d. 23. a. 1. q. 2` → `d23-a1-q2` ✓ · `d. XXIV. lit. Magistri, c. 1, et Comment. p. I. a. 2. q. 2. seq.` → `d24-p1-littera` and `d24-p1-a2-q2` ✓ · `d. 26. a. 1. q. 1. seq.` → `d26-a1-q1` ✓. **Every one resolves; the reading `dub. 4` is confirmed on the plate by its open-topped sort standing four words from three bare-stem `1`s in the same line.** The raw agrees on the whole chain except for its habitual flattening of `4` to `i`.
- **p. 268 n. 7 `d. 1. p. I. q. 2. et d. 4. p. I. a. 2. q. 2. seq.`** — the two disputed glyphs stand five words apart on one line and print as *different* sorts, the bare stem for `d. 1.` and the crossbarred open top for `d. 4.` Both resolve: Vol IV d.1 p.I has a single articulus, so the unstated coordinate makes `q. 2` → `bon-sent-IV-d1-p1-a1-q2` ✓ (Quaracchi's own omission-of-an-unambiguous-coordinate habit), and `d. 4. p. I. a. 2. q. 2` → `d4-p1-a2-q2` ✓.
- **p. 268 n. 2 `Hebr. 9, 15`** — settled by the words the anchor prints: *novi testamenti mediator* is Hebr. 9, 15 verbatim, and the note anchors on precisely that phrase.
- **p. 268 n. 4 `Ioan. 14, 6`** — settled the same way: *via, veritas et vita* is John 14, 6 verbatim, and the `14` prints one bare stem plus one crossbarred sort, the two classes side by side in one numeral.
- **p. 268 n. 6 `Ioan. 1, 14`** — settled by the anchored phrase *plenum gratiae et veritatis*, John 1, 14 verbatim. `tom. III. pag. 529, nota 9. et 10.` reads a flat-topped `5` and a bare-stem `1` in `10`.
- **p. 268 n. 8 `Matth. 4, 17. et Marc. 1, 14. seq. — Ioan. 2, 1. seqq. — Matth. 19, 4. seqq.`** — settled by the clause the note glosses, which names three things in order: *poenitentiam praedicavit* (Matt. 4, 17 / Mark 1, 14 f.), *nuptiis interfuit* (John 2, 1 ff., Cana) and *legem coniugii approbavit* (Matt. 19, 4 ff.). The order of the note's three members matches the order of the body's three verbs exactly.
- **p. 269 n. 1 `Cap. 6, 13. — Ibid. 10, 13; Matth. 19, 13. et Luc. 18, 15.`** — `Cap. 6, 13` inherits its book from the body's `sicut dicitur in Marco`, and Mark 6, 13 is *ungebant oleo multos aegrotos*, the words the anchor italicises; `Ibid. 10, 13`, Matt. 19, 13 and Luke 18, 15 are the three synoptic places where children are brought to be touched, which is what the note's own sentence says they say. `Act. 1, 5` is quoted verbatim in the note.
- **p. 269 n. 2 `Marc. 16, 15`** — the band prints the `1` as a bare stem and the raw flattens it to `46`; **`46` is impossible because Mark has sixteen chapters**, and 16, 15 is *Euntes in mundum universum praedicate*, the giving of the form the body names. `Luc. 22, 19` and `I. Cor. 11, 24` are the institution of the eucharist; `Ioan. 12, 24` is quoted verbatim in the note (*Nisi granum frumenti*) and matches the body's *comparando se grano frumenti*; `Matth. 18, 18` is the binding-and-loosing text the body's *potestatem ligandi et solvendi* names, and the note attaches it to the variant *Petro*.

**No `[?]` flags.** Every reading on both leaves was decided on band evidence with something independent agreeing.

**Marginalia** (Quaracchi editorial side-glosses, trimmed from the body per corpus convention; logged here in body order): p. 268 left column — "Thesis 1." — "Thesis 2." — "Thesis 3." — "Ratio." — "Pro thesi 1."; p. 268 right column — "Pro thesi 2." — "Pro thesi 3."; p. 269 left column — **none within Cap. IV**. ★ **The complete one-to-one `Thesis N.` / `Pro thesi N.` pair-series that Cap. III's head carried is here carried by the WHOLE capitulum**, three theses and three matching *Pro thesi* glosses spanning both columns of p. 268; and **the entire p. 269 remainder — twenty-two lines, a third of the chapter's length — carries no gloss at all**, the `Pro thesi 3.` gloss on p. 268 standing for all of it. **A gloss-free stretch is not a defect and no capitulum's gloss form may be inferred from its neighbour's.** Glosses stand in the outer margin of each column — left of column 1, right of column 2.

**★ THE PAGE MARKER SITS AT THE BREAK, NOT AT A PARAGRAPH BOUNDARY** — as throughout Partes V–VI. The leaf break falls inside the italicised formula *Spiritus sancti missionem*, between `Spiritus` and `sancti`, and that sentence runs on well into p. 269; `<!-- page 269 -->` therefore stands at the break itself in the Latin. **In the English it stands one word earlier**, after `— But before`, because English word order puts the genitive after its noun and there is no point inside "the mission of the Holy Spirit" that corresponds to the Latin break; the discrepancy is one clause-initial phrase and is recorded here rather than silently absorbed.

**★ THE RUNNING HEAD, read and used for nothing.** p. 268's reads `268   BREVILOQUII PARS VI. C. IV.` and p. 269's reads `PARS VI. C. V.   269`. Both name a chapter that is on the leaf, and p. 269's names the chapter that *opens* below the middle of the first column while the top 42 % of the leaf is still Cap. IV — the same asymmetry attested at pp. 237, 248, 266, 267 and 268, and now on two consecutive leaves in the same direction. **Both boundaries were set from `Cap. N.` headings on the bands.**

**★ NEITHER LEAF CARRIES A PRINTER'S OR QUIRE SIGNATURE.** The last was p. 265's (`S. Bonav. — Tom. V.` with quire `34`); the next is due around p. 273 on the eight-leaf cadence. Nothing on pp. 268–269 was mistaken for an entry.

**Raw-quality grade, per page and per region** (the raw was a cross-check only, never the base): **p. 268 body — good in both columns** (`inslilutiune`, `tan(|uam`, `Sucramentu s;mcli(icanlia`, `a«gnificunli.ani`, `divcrsinmde`, `i)ropter`, `quSa`, `1'alri` in the left; `kgan`, `sutlicientem`, `pro[X)Suit`, `admiiiiculantia`, `cvidcniiam`, `effwaciani`, `sclMbens`, `nuUrimonialis`, `.Vnlc` in the right), with the seven marginal glosses splicing in as separate line-blocks and one of them mis-numbered (`Thcsis 3.` printed twice, once where the band reads `Thesis 2.`) — **the band wins and the raw's gloss numerals are not usable.** **p. 268 footer — usable and sound in the sigla** (`S`, `\ S` for *A S*, `E`, and the whole `d. 3 … d. 26` chain came through), the numeral casualties being the habitual `i` for `4` in `dub. i`, `d. i.` and `Marc. I, 14`. **p. 269 body — good** (`M.ne<fo` for *unctio*, `nmiehanl` for *ungebant*, `Nedio` for *Medio*, `Ixclesiae`, `potest^tem`). **p. 269 footer — good, with `I K L O V`, `\EI1Z` for *A E H Z* and `IKLMOUV` all recoverable and `Marc. 16, 1.3` giving the chapter right and the verse wrong.** **The grade is stated per region so that the next chunk does not inherit the optimism** — p. 269's *right* block was not cross-checked here at all, nor read.

**Runover tests — BOTH OWED TESTS RUN; ONE POSITIVE, ONE NEGATIVE.**
- *p. 268's own gutter — **POSITIVE**, and logged as `p.268 n.4:gutter`.* The left block's last entry, n. 4, ends its visible portion with a **completed sentence** (`Ioan. 14, 6. — Superius pro *beatificantia* A S *beneficia*.`), and **p. 268's right block opens UNNUMBERED** with `Subinde pro *repararetur* 2 cum pluribus codd. *reparetur*, et E *perveniatur* pro *perveniretur*.` — the *Superius … Subinde* variant chain continuing across the gutter, and both variants (*beatificantia*, *repararetur*/*perveniretur*) standing in the right column above n. 4's own anchor. Rendered joined in the `p268-4` entry. ★ **The predecessor read the left block as ending "COMPLETE" at n. 4 and correctly declined to log the test, having not read the right block; the test could only be closed from both sides, and from both sides it is positive.**
- *Page-crossing, p. 268 → p. 269 — **NEGATIVE**, closed from both sides.* p. 268's right block ends **complete** at n. 8's `— Matth. 19, 4. seqq.`, and **p. 269's left block opens NUMBERED** at `¹ Cap. 6, 13. — Ibid. 10, 13…`
- *FORWARDED UNLOGGED:* **p. 269's own gutter test.** p. 269's left block runs nn. 1–4 and **breaks off inside n. 4 at `De hoc cap. cfr. IV. Sent. d. 6. p. II. a. 2, ubi de in-`** — mid-word and hyphenated — so the test will be positive from the left side; **but n. 4 is Cap. V's and the test is `bon-brev-p6-c5`'s to run and log, from both sides.** Not logged here.
- *NOT re-logged here:* `p.267 n.4:gutter` and the p. 267 → p. 268 page-crossing test (both `bon-brev-p6-c3`); `p.266 n.3:gutter` and the p. 266 → p. 267 test (both `p6-c2`); p. 265's own gutter test and the p. 265 → p. 266 test (both `p6-c1`, both NEGATIVE); the p. 264 → p. 265 test, p. 264's own gutter test and the p. 263 → p. 264 test (all `p5-c10`); and everything on `p6-c1`'s, `p6-c2`'s and `p6-c3`'s own do-not-re-log lists. Corpus-wide runover and chunk totals are **not written here** — derive them with `tools/check-vol5-census.py`.

**★ WHAT THIS CHUNK FORWARDS TO `bon-brev-p6-c5`.** p. 268 is **fully consumed** — eight notes, eight anchors, nothing left, and its total of 8 is now in `KNOWN_TOTALS`. **p. 269's register is NOT fully read and its total is deliberately NOT fed to `KNOWN_TOTALS`**: this chunk read nn. 1–2, which are Cap. IV's. **What was seen on p. 269's bands beyond n. 2, stated with its verification level and claiming nothing more:** the LEFT block continues with **n. 3** (`A P Q et 2 addunt *scilicet*, nonnulli alii *simul*.`) and **n. 4**, which opens `De hoc cap. cfr. IV. Sent. d. 6. p. II. a. 2, ubi de in-` and **breaks off there, mid-word and hyphenated, at the foot of the left block**. **BLOCK POSITION and VERBATIM TEXT of n. 3 and of n. 4's opening were read; NO anchor for either was read and none is claimed; the RIGHT block was NOT read at all and p. 269's total is UNKNOWN.** ★ **EVERY DIGIT AND SIGLUM IN nn. 3–4 ABOVE IS UNVERIFIED** — the run `A P Q`, the edition siglum `2`, and `IV. Sent. d. 6. p. II. a. 2` all come off a single band pass; `d. 6. p. II. a. 2.` is a live target that must be checked to exist, and its `6` and `2`s sit in the `1`/`4` and `3`/`5` risk classes alike. **Re-derive all of it. A hand-off is a claim to re-derive, never a fact to adopt.** `bon-brev-p6-c5` owns p. 269 from n. 3 onward, must read the right block, must fix p. 269's total, must run **p. 269's own gutter test** (forwarded UNLOGGED above; it looks positive from the left side but is not closed) **and the p. 269 → p. 270 test**, and must extract p. 270 fresh with no constant. Cap. V (`De Sacramentorum dispensatione`) opens ~42 % down p. 269's left column with a ONE-line subtitle and a `Thesis 1.` gloss; **its end must be set from the `Cap. VI.` heading on the band and from nothing else.**

**Register — Pars VI's vocabulary was FOLLOWED, not re-decided, and the Vol IV settlement was CONSULTED rather than re-argued.** `bon-brev-p6-c1` locked the sacramental core, `p6-c2` the historical-dispensation vocabulary, and `p6-c3` the seven sacrament names off the Vol IV d.1–d.21 settlement; all three stand unchanged here, including *matrimonium* → "marriage" with *nuptiae* kept distinct as "nuptials" (both words occur in this capitulum, one clause apart, in `dum poenitentiam praedicavit et nuptiis interfuit et legem coniugii approbavit`, so the distinction is doing work). This capitulum turns on *institutio* and on Christ as *mediator* and *lator legis*: **fixed here** — *institutio / instituere* → "institution / to institute" throughout (never "to found" or "to establish", which is reserved for *statuere*); *novi testamenti mediator* → "the mediator of the new testament", the Vulgate's own wording at Hebr. 9, 15; *lator legis* → "bearer of the law" (Bonaventure's *praecipuus lator*, with *legislator* at the chapter's close rendered "lawgiver", the two kept distinct because the plate keeps them distinct); *statuere* → "to establish"; *adminiculantia* → "auxiliary"; *significantia / efficacia* → "significancy / efficacy", the pair on which the whole chapter's argument turns; *confirmando, approbando, consummando, insinuando, initiando, suscipiendo* → "by confirming, approving, consummating, insinuating, initiating, receiving", the gerunds kept as gerunds; *sensus maxime cognoscitivi* → "the senses most apt for knowing"; *evolatio* → "the flight upward"; *cibatio* → "feeding"; *conficere* → "to confect" (the technical eucharistic sense, as in Vol IV). *Verbum incarnatum* stays "the Word incarnate" per Pars IV. Quaracchi's em-dash articulations are preserved, and Bonaventure's *quia/cum/ideo* chains are kept as one English sentence throughout — the *Ratio autem* period, the *Rursus* period and the *Postremo* period each run as a single sentence in English, the last across the page break.


site: bonaventure

collection: Breviloquium

title: Pars 6, Cap. 5

title_alt:
De Sacramentorum dispensatione
On the dispensation of the Sacraments

author: St. Bonaventure

languages: en la

title: Opera Omnia (Quaracchi critical edition)

publisher: Collegii S. Bonaventurae

source_text:
<!-- page 269 -->

### Capitulum V. *De Sacramentorum dispensatione.*

De *dispensatione* autem Sacramentorum hoc tenendum est, quod potestas dispensationis Sacramentorum regulariter spectat ad solum genus humanum. — In omnibus autem Sacramentis dispensandis necessaria est in dispensante intentio. — In aliquibus etiam necessario cum intentione requiritur ordo *sacerdotalis*[^p269-3], vel *pontificalis*; *pontificalis*, inquam, necessarius est dispensationi *confirmationis* et *ordinis*; *sacerdotalis* vero dispensationi *eucharistiae, poenitentiae* et *unctionis extremae*. *Baptismus* autem et *matrimonium*, licet ad sacerdotes spectent, possunt tamen praeter ordinem sacerdotalem dispensari de facto, maxime in articulo necessitatis. — His autem existentibus, Sacramenta dispensari possunt a bonis et malis, a fidelibus et haereticis, *intra* Ecclesiam et *extra*, sed *intra* secundum veritatem et ad utilitatem, *extra* vero non ad utilitatem, licet dispensentur secundum veritatem[^p269-4].

Ratio autem ad intelligentiam praedictorum haec est: quia reparativum principium nostrum, Verbum scilicet incarnatum, quia[^p269-5] in quantum Deus et homo Sacramenta instituit ad salutem hominum, ordinavit, sicut et congruum fuit, ut hominibus dispensarentur per ministerium hominum propter servandam conformitatem dispensatoris ad salvatorem Christum et ad ipsum hominem salvandum. Quoniam ergo Christus salvator humanum genus salvavit, secundum quod exigebat *aequitas iuris, dignitas ordinis* et *securitas salutis* — *operatus est* enim *salutem*[^p269-6] nostram modo recto, ordinato et certo — hinc est, quod secundum horum trium exigentiam Sacramenta commisit hominibus dispensanda. — Primo igitur, quia *rectitudo iuris* exigit, ut opera hominis, secundum quod *homo*, non fiant praecipitanter; et opera hominis ut *ministri Christi* aliquo modo referantur ad Christum; et opera hominis ut *ministri salutis* aliquo modo referantur ad salutem vel in generali, vel in speciali; et dispensatio Sacramentorum est opus hominis ut *rationalis*, ut *ministri Christi* et ut *ministri salutis*: hinc est, quod necesse est, quod fiat *ex intentione*; et ex intentione[^p269-7], qua quis intendat facere quod Christus instituit ad humanam salutem, vel saltem facere quod facit Ecclesia, in quo clauditur in generali intentio praedicta, quia ipsa Ecclesia, sicut Sacramenta a Christo accepit, sic ad fidelium salutem dispensat.

Rursus, quia *ordo dignitatis* exigit, ut maiora maioribus, minora minoribus et media mediocribus[^p269-8] committantur; et quaedam sunt Sacramenta, quae praecipue respiciunt *excellentiam virtutis* sive dignitatis, ut Sacramentum confirmationis et ordinis; quaedam, quae respiciunt *indigentiam necessitatis*, ut baptismus et matrimonium, quorum unum generat, alterum regenerat ad existentiam debitam; quaedam autem *media*, ut eucharistia, poenitentia et unctio extrema: hinc est, quod *prima* tanquam suprema
<!-- page 270 -->
non possunt dispensari nisi ab episcopis et pontificibus, quantum est de iure communi; *alia* vero tanquam infima dispensari possunt a quibuscumque ordinibus et personis inferioribus, maxime in articulo necessitatis, quod dico ratione baptismi; *media* vero a solis sacerdotibus, qui inter episcopos et inferiores personas sunt quasi in medio constituti.

Postremo, quia *securitas salutis* exigit, ut res sic fiat, ut in dubium non cadat; et nullus est, qui certus sit de bonitate et credulitate dispensatoris, et idem ipse non est certus de se, *utrum amore, an odio dignus sit*[^p270-1]: ideo, si Sacramenta dispensari solum possent a bonis, nullus esset *certus* de susceptione Sacramenti; et sic oporteret semper iterari, et *malitia* unius praeiudicaret alienae saluti; nulla etiam esset *stabilitas* in gradibus hierarchiae Ecclesiae militantis, quae maxime consistit in Sacramentis dispensandis. Et ideo congruum fuit, ut Sacramentorum dispensatio committeretur homini non ratione *sanctitatis*, quae variatur secundum voluntatem, sed ratione *auctoritatis*, quae semper manet, quantum est de se; ac per hoc oportuit, quod se extenderet ad bonos et ad malos, ad eos qui sunt *intra*, et ad eos qui sunt *extra* Ecclesiam. — Verum, quia *extra* unitatem fidei et caritatis, quae facit nos filios Ecclesiae et membra, nullus potest salvari; ideo, si Sacramenta *extra* recipiantur, non ad salutem recipiuntur, quamvis vera sint Sacramenta; sed utilia possunt fieri, si quis redeat ad sanctam matrem Ecclesiam, unicam Christi sponsam, cuius filios tantum Christus sponsus reputat dignos hereditate aeterna. Unde Augustinus contra Donatistas[^p270-2]: « Ecclesia paradiso comparata indicat nobis, posse quidem *baptismum* eius homines etiam foris accipere, sed *salutem beatitudinis* extra eam neminem vel percipere vel tenere. Nam et flumina de fonte paradisi, sicut Scriptura testatur, etiam foras largiter manaverunt; nominatim quippe commemorantur et per quas terras fluant, et quod extra paradisum constituta sint, omnibus notum est; nec tamen in Mesopotamia vel in Aegypto, quo illa flumina pervenerunt, est felicitas vitae, quae in paradiso commemoratur. Ita fit, ut, cum paradisi *aqua* sit extra paradisum, *beatitudo* tamen non sit nisi intra paradisum. Sic ergo *baptismus* Ecclesiae potest esse extra Ecclesiam, *munus* autem *beatae vitae* non nisi intra Ecclesiam reperitur, quae super petram etiam fundata est, quae ligandi et solvendi claves accepit. Haec est una, quae tenet et possidet omnem sponsi sui et Domini potestatem, per quam coniugalem potestatem etiam de ancillis parere filios potest, qui, si non superbiant, in sortem hereditatis vocabuntur, si autem superbiant, extra remanebunt. Magis ergo, quia pro Ecclesiae honore atque unitate pugnamus, non tribuamus haereticis quidquid apud eos eius agnoscimus, sed eos arguentes doceamus, quod ex unitate habent nec valere ad salutem, nisi ad eandem venerint unitatem ».

---

english:
### Chapter V. *On the dispensation of the Sacraments.*

Concerning the *dispensation* of the Sacraments, moreover, this must be held: that the power of dispensing the Sacraments regularly pertains to the human race alone. — And in the dispensing of all the Sacraments an intention in the one dispensing is necessary. — In some, moreover, there is necessarily required, together with the intention, the *priestly*[^p269-3] or the *pontifical* order; the *pontifical*, I say, is necessary for the dispensation of *confirmation* and of *order*, but the *priestly* for the dispensation of *the eucharist, penance* and *extreme unction*. *Baptism*, however, and *marriage*, although they pertain to priests, can nevertheless in fact be dispensed apart from the priestly order, most of all in the article of necessity. — And these things being so, the Sacraments can be dispensed by the good and by the wicked, by the faithful and by heretics, *within* the Church and *without*, but *within* according to truth and unto profit, *without* indeed not unto profit, although they be dispensed according to truth[^p269-4].

Now the reason for the understanding of the foresaid is this: since our reparative principle, the Word namely incarnate, because[^p269-5] inasmuch as he is God and man he instituted the Sacraments for the salvation of men, he ordained — as was also fitting — that they should be dispensed to men through the ministry of men, for the preserving of the conformity of the dispenser to Christ the savior and to the very man to be saved. Since therefore Christ the savior saved the human race according as *the equity of right, the dignity of order* and *the security of salvation* demanded — for *he wrought* our *salvation*[^p269-6] in a manner right, ordered and certain — hence it is that according to the exigency of these three he committed the Sacraments to men to be dispensed. — First, therefore, because *the rectitude of right* demands that the works of a man, according as he is *man*, be not done precipitately; and that the works of a man as *minister of Christ* be in some manner referred to Christ; and that the works of a man as *minister of salvation* be in some manner referred to salvation, either in general or in particular; and the dispensation of the Sacraments is the work of a man as *rational*, as *minister of Christ* and as *minister of salvation*: hence it is that it is necessary that it be done *from intention*; and from that intention[^p269-7] by which one intends to do what Christ instituted for human salvation, or at least to do what the Church does, in which the foresaid intention is included in general, because the Church herself, as she received the Sacraments from Christ, so dispenses them unto the salvation of the faithful.

Again, because *the order of dignity* demands that greater things be committed to the greater, lesser to the lesser and middling to the middling[^p269-8]; and some Sacraments there are which regard chiefly *the excellence of power* or of dignity, as the Sacrament of confirmation and of order; some which regard *the indigence of necessity*, as baptism and marriage, of which the one generates and the other regenerates unto the existence that is due; and some indeed *middling*, as the eucharist, penance and extreme unction: hence it is that *the first*, as supreme,
<!-- page 270 -->
cannot be dispensed save by bishops and pontiffs, so far as pertains to the common law; *the others* indeed, as lowest, can be dispensed by any orders and inferior persons whatsoever, most of all in the article of necessity — which I say by reason of baptism; but *the middling* by priests alone, who between bishops and inferior persons are constituted as it were in the middle.

Lastly, because *the security of salvation* demands that the thing be so done that it fall not into doubt; and there is no one who is certain of the goodness and belief of the dispenser, and he himself is not certain concerning himself, *whether he be worthy of love or of hatred*[^p270-1]: therefore, if the Sacraments could be dispensed only by the good, no one would be *certain* of the reception of the Sacrament; and thus it would behove them always to be iterated, and the *malice* of one would prejudice another's salvation; nor would there be any *stability* in the grades of the hierarchy of the Church militant, which consists most of all in the dispensing of the Sacraments. And therefore it was fitting that the dispensation of the Sacraments should be committed to man not by reason of *sanctity*, which varies according to the will, but by reason of *authority*, which always remains, so far as pertains to itself; and through this it behoved that it should extend itself to the good and to the wicked, to those who are *within*, and to those who are *without* the Church. — Yet, because *outside* the unity of faith and charity, which makes us sons and members of the Church, no one can be saved; therefore, if the Sacraments be received *outside*, they are not received unto salvation, although they be true Sacraments; but they can be made profitable if one return to holy mother Church, the one bride of Christ, whose sons alone Christ the bridegroom accounts worthy of the eternal inheritance. Whence Augustine against the Donatists[^p270-2]: « The Church, compared to paradise, indicates to us that men can indeed receive her *baptism* even outside, but that no one outside her can either receive or hold *the salvation of beatitude*. For the rivers also from the fount of paradise, as Scripture testifies, flowed abundantly even outside; indeed they are expressly recorded, and through what lands they flow, and that they are set outside paradise is known to all; nor yet in Mesopotamia or in Egypt, whither those rivers came, is there the felicity of life which is recorded of paradise. Thus it comes about that, although the *water* of paradise is outside paradise, *beatitude* nevertheless is not save within paradise. So therefore the *baptism* of the Church can be outside the Church, but the *gift* of *the blessed life* is not found save within the Church, which is founded also upon the rock, which received the keys of binding and loosing. This is the one which holds and possesses all the power of her spouse and Lord, through which conjugal power she can even bear sons of handmaids, who, if they be not proud, shall be called into the lot of the inheritance, but if they be proud, shall remain outside. The more, therefore, since we fight for the honor and unity of the Church, let us not grant to heretics whatever of hers we recognize among them, but, refuting them, let us teach that what they have from unity avails them not unto salvation, unless they come to that same unity ».

---

la: A P Q et 2 addunt *scilicet*, nonnulli alii *simul*.

en: A P Q and edition 2 add *scilicet*; some others *simul*.

la: De hoc cap. cfr. IV. Sent. d. 6. p. II. a. 2, ubi de intentione; d. 5. a. 1. et 2, ubi de ministro baptismi (a. 1. q. 1. casus 1. ostenditur, non spiritum, sed hominem esse ministrum); d. 7. a. 1. q. 3. de ministro confirmationis; d. 13. a. 1. q. 1. seqq. de ministro eucharistiae; d. 17. p. III. a. 1. et d. 19. per totam de ministro poenitentiae; d. 23. a. 2. q. 1. de ministro extremae unctionis; d. 25. a. 1. de ministro ordinis; d. 27. a. 2. q. 1. et d. 28. q. 5. de ministro matrimonii. — Superius pro *haereticis* plures codd. *infidelibus*, B *infidelibus et haereticis*.

en: On this chapter cf. IV Sent. d. 6, p. II, a. 2, where on the intention; d. 5, a. 1 and 2, where on the minister of baptism (in a. 1, q. 1, case 1 it is shown that the minister is not a spirit but a man); d. 7, a. 1, q. 3, on the minister of confirmation; d. 13, a. 1, q. 1 seqq., on the minister of the eucharist; d. 17, p. III, a. 1, and d. 19 throughout, on the minister of penance; d. 23, a. 2, q. 1, on the minister of extreme unction; d. 25, a. 1, on the minister of order; d. 27, a. 2, q. 1, and d. 28, q. 5, on the minister of marriage. — Above, for *haereticis*, several codices read *infidelibus*, B *infidelibus et haereticis*.

la: Fide communissimae lectionis codd. et 2 adiecimus *quia*. Mox post *instituit* A et I addunt *et*, mutato subinde cum B *sicut* in *sic*.

en: On the faith of the most common reading of the codices and of edition 2 we have added *quia*. Shortly after, following *instituit*, A and I add *et*, and then, with B, change *sicut* into *sic*.

la: Ex B I O P addidimus *et ex intentione*, D G *et ex tali intentione*. Infra pro *in quo* A L *in qua*.

en: From B I O P we have added *et ex intentione*; D G read *et ex tali intentione*. Below, for *in quo*, A L read *in qua*.

la: Vat., 1 et 3 *mediis*.

en: The Vatican codex and editions 1 and 3 read *mediis*.

en: Eccles. 9, 1. — Below, for *alienae*, I K L O read *alterius*.

la: Libr. IV. de Baptismo contra Donat. c. 1. et 2. Respicitur in ipso textu Gen. 2, 8. et 10. seqq.; Matth. 16, 18. seq. et Gal. 4, 22. seqq.

en: Book IV of *On Baptism, against the Donatists*, cc. 1 and 2. In the text itself there is regard to Gen. 2, 8 and 10 seqq.; Matt. 16, 18 seq., and Gal. 4, 22 seqq. ---

translators_notes:
**★★ PAGE SPAN — pp. 269–270, AND BOTH ENDS ARE FIXED POSITIVELY FROM HEADINGS.** `Cap. V.` with the **ONE-line** subtitle `De Sacramentorum dispensatione.` stands centred in p. 269's LEFT column about **42 %** down the leaf, immediately below Cap. IV's closing `…tanquam Sacramenta substantialia novi testamenti et propria legislatoris, Verbi scilicet incarnati.` — where `bon-brev-p6-c4` said it stood, and re-set here line by line off the band rather than adopted. The title is taken from **this heading**, never from the volume index, whose Pars VI titles are OCR-garbled throughout the block (`Dc Sacrainentoriim dispensatione`). Cap. V fills the rest of p. 269's left column to `…maxime in articulo necessitatis. —`; crosses p. 269's gutter **at an em-dash articulation inside a single paragraph** (`necessitatis. —` / `His autem existentibus`, the fourth thesis continuing the run of three, and `His` set flush, NOT indented, which is what shows the paragraph did not break there); fills p. 269's right column entire to `…hinc est, quod *prima* tanquam suprema`; breaks across the leaf **MID-SENTENCE between a subject and its verb** (`prima tanquam suprema` / `non possunt dispensari`), neither half readable alone; and closes about **55 %** down p. 270's RIGHT column at `…nisi ad eandem venerint unitatem ».`

**★★ THE CLOSE IS ESTABLISHED FROM THE `Cap. VI.` HEADING AND FROM NOTHING ELSE.** `Cap. VI.` with the ONE-line subtitle `De Sacramentorum iteratione.` stands centred in p. 270's RIGHT column immediately below Cap. V's last line, with Cap. VI's opening beneath it in the same column (`De *iteratione* autem Sacramentorum hoc tenendum est, quod licet commune sit omnibus Sacramentis non iterari…`) beside a fresh `Thesis 1.` gloss. **The volume index's "Cap. VI on p. 270" and p. 270's running head `BREVILOQUII PARS VI. C. VI.` were BOTH hypotheses on arrival; the heading on the band is what closes Cap. V, and the running head was used for nothing.** No inference was drawn from white space at any column foot, and the fact that Cap. V's tail is a closed quotation ending in a full stop and a French quote-mark was not treated as evidence of anything — the `Cap. VI.` heading two lines below it is.

**Gutters — one re-derived from scratch, one settled fresh with no constant. Both defaults landed on 59 px runs, one pixel below the trust floor, and neither was adopted on its own showing.**
- **p. 269 = 1186, RE-DERIVED rather than re-used.** `colcrop.py vol5 269` with no constant returns **1185 on a 59 px run**, so the three-step method was run again from the beginning. Six windows blow out and are discarded (20–40 % → 1241/**169 px** · 35–55 % → 1294/**394 px** · 40–60 % → 1273/**235 px** · 55–75 % → 1300/**290 px** · 60–80 % → 1322/**336 px** · 70–89 % → 1225/**146 px**), all of them landing on the `Cap. V.` heading, its subtitle, or the short right-column footer; the six survivors agree tightly — 15–35 % → 1188/64 · 25–45 % → 1188/64 · 30–50 % → 1188/64 · 45–65 % → 1187/64 · 50–70 % → 1187/64 · 65–85 % → 1185/61 — **a 3 px spread on runs of 61–64 px**, the trustworthy profile. Step 3 was run independently and reproduced the predecessor's band edges digit for digit: over rows 35–85 % the left column's ink dies at x = 1155 and the right column's resumes at x = 1216, so the near-zero band is **x = 1156–1215 (60 px)**, with Quaracchi's printed column rule inside it at **x = 1183–1189, peaking 767 rows on x = 1186** (408 · 455 · **767** · 534 · 214 on x = 1184–1188). **Band midpoint 1185.5, rule centre 1186 — the rule is centred, 1186 adopted**, and its heavy inking is precisely why the default run was pinched to 59 px. Bands regenerated at 1186 and read clean edge to edge.
- **★★ p. 270 = 1373, SETTLED FRESH WITH NO CONSTANT.** p. 270 had not been imaged; extracted at 450 dpi and profiled with no constant, `colcrop.py vol5 270` returns **1374 on a 59 px run** — again below the floor, so the full sweep was run. Four windows blow out (20–40 % → 1389/**93 px** · 25–45 % → 1431/**180 px** · 60–80 % → 1271/**229 px** · 65–85 % → 1233/**305 px** · 70–89 % → 1287/**238 px**), the last three on the `Cap. VI.` heading and subtitle set mid-right-column — **the p. 263 failure mode exactly, an ordinary capitulum heading inside a column flooding one side of the window.** The eight survivors agree to 2 px: 15–35 % → 1373/62 · 30–50 % → 1372/61 · 35–55 % → 1371/62 · 40–60 % → 1371/62 · 45–65 % → 1372/64 · 50–70 % → 1372/64 · 55–75 % → 1373/63. The per-column ink profile settles it: the near-zero band is **x = 1344–1402 (59 px)** and the printed column rule stands inside it at **x = 1371–1376, peaking 573 rows on x = 1372** with a second peak of 375 on x = 1375. **Band midpoint 1373, rule centre ~1373.5 — centred, and 1373 is adopted.** Bands regenerated at 1373 and read clean edge to edge.

**Apparatus source.** Vol V's IA OCR renders footnote numerals as punctuation glyphs — anchor POSITIONS survive in the raw, numbers and footer-entry openers do NOT. **All eight notes here were read off the 450 dpi footer bands**; the counts are band-derived. `audit-apparatus-count` is blind to Vol V; `tools/check-vol5-apparatus.py` is the instrument, and **p. 269's total of 8 is established here and entered into its `KNOWN_TOTALS`** (`bon-brev-p6-c4` deliberately did not enter it, having read only p. 269's left block). **p. 270's register was band-read in full and its total of 5 is likewise entered**, with nn. 3–5 forwarded as a legitimate PENDING.

**★★ THE INCOMING HAND-OFF WAS RE-DERIVED IN FULL AND HELD IN EVERY PARTICULAR — INCLUDING THE TWO READINGS IT EXPLICITLY FLAGGED AS UNVERIFIED.** `bon-brev-p6-c4` forwarded p. 269 from n. 3 onward and stated its verification level precisely: **BLOCK POSITION and VERBATIM TEXT of n. 3 and of n. 4's opening read off the LEFT block, which breaks off mid-word inside n. 4; NO anchor read for either and none claimed; the RIGHT block NOT read at all; p. 269's total UNKNOWN.** Every clause of that is correct. Its two flagged risks both resolve to the forwarded reading: the siglum run **`A P Q`** is confirmed at 2.4× (three unmistakable sorts, strictly ascending, with the edition siglum `2` printing as a different sort in the same clause), and **`IV. Sent. d. 6. p. II. a. 2`** is confirmed both on the plate and against the corpus — `bon-sent-IV-d6-p2-a2-q1` is *Utrum intentio in conferente sit de necessitate baptismi*, which is exactly the `ubi de intentione` the note claims for it. **The predecessor's narrative summary and its per-note data agreed, and both survived re-derivation; nothing had to be withdrawn.** Verification level of every note as established **here**:
- **p. 269 n. 3** — POSITION, COLUMN and OWNERSHIP all verified here, first-read; the hand-off claimed no anchor. Anchors on `requiritur ordo *sacerdotalis* ³,` in the **LEFT** column, inside Cap. V's *Thesis 3*. Footer entry third in the left block, complete.
- **p. 269 n. 4** — POSITION, COLUMN and OWNERSHIP all verified here, first-read. Anchors on `licet dispensentur secundum veritatem ⁴.` in the **RIGHT** column, closing *Thesis 4*. Footer entry last in the left block, **breaking off mid-word and hyphenated at `ubi de in-` and continuing unnumbered at the head of the right block** with `tentione; d. 5. a. 1. et 2, …` (below).
- **p. 269 n. 5** — first-read here. POSITION, COLUMN and OWNERSHIP all verified: anchors on `Verbum scilicet incarnatum, quia ⁵ in quantum Deus et homo` in the **RIGHT** column, two lines into the *Ratio* paragraph. Footer entry second in the right block.
- **p. 269 n. 6** — first-read here. POSITION, COLUMN and OWNERSHIP all verified: anchors on `*operatus est* enim *salutem* ⁶ nostram` in the **RIGHT** column, inside the *Triplex exigentia* parenthesis. Footer entry third in the right block.
- **p. 269 n. 7** — first-read here. POSITION, COLUMN and OWNERSHIP all verified: anchors on `et ex intentione ⁷, qua quis` in the **RIGHT** column, inside *Ex prima arguitur pro thesi 2*. Footer entry fourth in the right block.
- **p. 269 n. 8** — first-read here. POSITION, COLUMN and OWNERSHIP all verified: anchors on `media mediocribus ⁸ committantur` in the **RIGHT** column, opening *Ex secunda pro thesi 3*. Footer entry last in the right block and complete.
- **p. 270 n. 1** — first-read here. POSITION, COLUMN and OWNERSHIP all verified: anchors on `*utrum amore, an odio dignus sit* ¹:` in p. 270's **LEFT** column, inside *Ex tertia arguitur pro thesi 4*. Footer entry opens p. 270's left block, NUMBERED.
- **p. 270 n. 2** — first-read here. POSITION, COLUMN and OWNERSHIP all verified: anchors on `Unde Augustinus contra Donatistas ²:` in p. 270's **LEFT** column, opening the long Augustine quotation. Footer entry second in the left block.

**★ p. 269's SPLIT MAP — THE BLOCK SPLIT IS 4/4 AND THE ANCHOR SPLIT IS 3/5, AND THEY DO NOT COINCIDE; p. 268 ONE LEAF BACK HAD EXACTLY THE SAME SHAPE.** Left footer block: nn. 1, 2, 3, 4 (n. 4 breaking off mid-word). Right footer block: n. 4's unnumbered continuation, then nn. 5, 6, 7, 8. **Anchors:** nn. 1–3 in the left column, nn. 4–8 in the right — n. 4 straddles, with its entry begun in the left block and its anchor in the right column. **p. 269's TOTAL IS 8, and the page is now fully consumed** (nn. 1–2 `p6-c4`, nn. 3–8 here). **The capitulum boundary falls inside the left block, between nn. 2 and 3** — a third structure again independent of the other two.

**★ p. 270's SPLIT MAP, band-read in full though only nn. 1–2 are owned here.** Left footer block: nn. 1, 2, 3, 4 (n. 4 breaking off mid-quotation at `quod « baptismus sit *fundamentum* omnium`). Right footer block: n. 4's unnumbered continuation (`Sacramentorum », et quod « ante susceptionem baptismi…`), then n. 5. **Anchors:** nn. 1–2 in the LEFT column (both Cap. V's), nn. 3–5 in the RIGHT (all Cap. VI's, which opens 55 % down that column). **p. 270's TOTAL IS 5.** ★ **p. 270 repeats p. 269's straddle in the same place**: n. 4's entry begins in the left block and its anchor is in the right column, so **p. 270's own gutter runover is POSITIVE — but n. 4 is Cap. VI's and the test is `bon-brev-p6-c6`'s to log, not this chunk's.** Forwarded UNLOGGED below.

**★★ SIGLA — SIX RUNS ON THE TWO LEAVES, ALL SETTLED BY STROKE COUNT, ALPHABETICAL ASCENT AND GRAMMATICAL SLOT. NOT ONE `H` IS ADMITTED ON EITHER LEAF, AND THAT IS ITSELF THE FINDING.**
1. **`A P Q` (p. 269 n. 3)** — three unmistakable single sorts, strictly ascending, in the codex-siglum slot governing the added *scilicet*; the edition siglum `2` stands in the same clause and prints as a plainly different sort, the pattern the frozen rule names.
2. **`B` (p. 269 n. 4's continuation)** — a single sort governing *infidelibus et haereticis*, contrasted in the same sentence with *plures codd.*
3. **`A et I` and `B` (p. 269 n. 5)** — `I` here is a **single** upright with head and foot serifs and is therefore `I` by the one-upright rule, never a crossbar-less `H`; `A et I` is a two-member run joined by *et*, and `B` stands separately in the following clause governing *sic*.
4. **`B I O P` and `D G` and `A L` (p. 269 n. 7)** — three runs in one note, each strictly ascending; `B I O P`'s second glyph is again a single upright. ★ **This is the p. 228 n. 3 pattern: one note carrying different siglum sets a clause apart**, and here it carries three.
5. **`I K L O` (p. 270 n. 1)** — a single upright, then `K`, `L`, `O`; the ascent excludes the volume's chronic raw `R` for `K`, and the raw confirms `I K L 0` with only its habitual `0` for `O`.
6. **`Vat., 1 et 3` (p. 269 n. 8)** — not codex sigla at all but the Vatican codex and the edition numerals, and the `1` prints as a bare flagged stem against the `3`'s double bowl, the two risk classes side by side in four characters.

**Digits settled off the band, each with something independent agreeing** (per the frozen rule). **The `3`/`5` class dominates these two leaves, reversing p. 268's `1`/`4` bias one leaf back** — exactly the leaf-to-leaf swing the rule warns about, and the reason the previous leaf's calibration was not carried over:
- **p. 269 n. 4's `d. 5 … d. 28` chain — the densest locus concentration in Pars VI after p. 268 n. 3's, and it was settled by checking that EVERY locus in it exists AND that every locus's subject matches the description the note itself gives it.** Per the frozen inheritance rule the chain states `IV. Sent.` once and then lists distinctions bare, so all nine loci are live targets: `d. 6. p. II. a. 2` *ubi de intentione* → `bon-sent-IV-d6-p2-a2-q1` *Utrum intentio in conferente sit de necessitate baptismi* ✓ · `d. 5. a. 1. et 2` *ubi de ministro baptismi* → `d5-a1-q1` *Utrum soli sacerdotes sive clerici habeant potestatem baptizandi* and `d5-a2-q1` *Utrum mali ministri dent Sacramentum et rem Sacramenti* ✓ · `d. 7. a. 1. q. 3` *de ministro confirmationis* → `d7-a1-q3` *Utrum quilibet possit dispensare confirmationem* ✓ · `d. 13. a. 1. q. 1. seqq.` *de ministro eucharistiae* → `d13-a1-q1` *Utrum omnis sacerdos possit conficere* ✓ · `d. 17. p. III. a. 1.` and `d. 19. per totam` *de ministro poenitentiae* → `d17-p3-a1-q1` *Utrum sufficiat confiteri laico* and the whole of d.19 ✓ · `d. 23. a. 2. q. 1` *de ministro extremae unctionis* → `d23-a2-q1` *Quis debeat administrare hoc Sacramentum* ✓ · `d. 25. a. 1.` *de ministro ordinis* → `d25-a1-q1` *Utrum solus episcopus possit ordinare* ✓ · `d. 27. a. 2. q. 1.` and `d. 28. q. 5.` *de ministro matrimonii* → `d27-a2-q1` *Utrum consensus sit causa matrimonii* and `d28-a1-q5` *Utrum consensus de praesenti expressus in occulto faciat matrimonium* ✓. **`d. 28. q. 5.` resolves through Quaracchi's habit of omitting a coordinate that is unambiguous in the print — Vol IV d.28 has a single articulus.** The raw mangles four of these digits (`d. B.` for `d. 6.`, `d. o.` for `d. 5.`, `d. 2.')` for `d. 25.`, `q. ,S.` for `q. 5.`); **the band settles all four, and the subject-match settles them a second time.**
- **p. 269 n. 6 `Psalm. 73, 12`** — settled by the words the anchor italicises: *operatus est … salutem* is Ps. 73, 12 (*operatus est salutem in medio terrae*) verbatim, and the note anchors on precisely that phrase. The `73` prints a flat-topped `7` and a double-bowled `3`, the `3`/`5` discriminator at its clearest on the leaf.
- **p. 270 n. 1 `Eccle. 9, 1`** — settled the same way: *utrum amore an odio dignus sit* is Eccles. 9, 1 verbatim, and it is the phrase the anchor closes. The `9` and the bare-stem `1` stand three characters apart and print as different sorts.
- **p. 270 n. 2 `Libr. IV. de Baptismo contra Donat. c. 1. et 2. … Gen. 2, 8. et 10. seqq.; Matth. 16, 18. seq. et Gal. 4, 22. seqq.`** — settled by the quotation the note glosses, which names each of the three scriptural places in turn: the rivers of paradise and the lands they flow through (Gen. 2, 8 and 10 ff.), *quae super petram etiam fundata est, quae ligandi et solvendi claves accepit* (Matt. 16, 18 f.), and *de ancillis parere filios* (Gal. 4, 22 ff., Hagar and Sarah). The order of the note's three members matches the order of the quotation's three allusions exactly. `Libr. IV … c. 1. et 2.` is Augustine *De baptismo contra Donatistas* IV, cc. 1–2, where the paradise comparison stands.

**No `[?]` flags.** Every reading on both leaves was decided on band evidence with something independent agreeing.

**Marginalia** (Quaracchi editorial side-glosses, trimmed from the body per corpus convention; logged here in body order): p. 269 left column — "Thesis 1." — "Thesis 2." — "Thesis 3."; p. 269 right column — "Thesis 4." — "Ratio." — "Pro thesi 1." — "Triplex exigentia." — "Ex prima arguitur pro thesi 2." — "Ex secunda pro thesi 3."; p. 270 left column — "Ex tertia arguitur pro thesi 4." — "Extra unitatem deest utilitas." — "Confirmatur." ★ **Twelve glosses, and the series is NOT the tidy `Thesis N.` / `Pro thesi N.` one-to-one pairing Cap. IV carried**: four theses are answered by *Pro thesi 1* and then by three *Ex prima / Ex secunda / Ex tertia arguitur pro thesi 2 / 3 / 4* glosses keyed to the *triplex exigentia*, and the chapter closes with two free-standing glosses (*Extra unitatem deest utilitas*, *Confirmatur*) that belong to no thesis at all. **Cap. IV's whole p. 269 remainder carried no gloss whatever; Cap. V opening in the same column carries twelve. No capitulum's gloss form may be inferred from its neighbour's** — and the `Thesis 3.` gloss on p. 269 is set beside the *third* line of the theses run rather than at its head, so gloss position is not an anchor either. Glosses stand in the outer margin of each column — left of column 1, right of column 2 — and the raw's rendering of them (`Tripiei eii-gentia`, `Esprimaar- thesraP™`, `Eiira uni- uiiiitas.`) is unusable; all twelve are band reads.

**★ THE PAGE MARKER SITS AT THE BREAK, NOT AT A PARAGRAPH BOUNDARY** — as throughout Partes V–VI. The leaf break falls between `suprema` and `non possunt dispensari`, inside the *Rursus* period's apodosis, splitting a subject from its verb. **In the English it stands at the same point**, after "as supreme," because English keeps the appositive before the verb here; the Latin and English markers coincide, which they did not on p. 268 → 269.

**★ THE RUNNING HEAD, read and used for nothing.** p. 269's reads `PARS VI. C. V.   269` and p. 270's reads `270   BREVILOQUII PARS VI. C. VI.` Both name the chapter that *opens* on the leaf rather than the one that fills it — p. 269's names Cap. V while the top 42 % is Cap. IV, and p. 270's names Cap. VI while the first 55 % of the leaf and the whole left column are Cap. V. **This is the asymmetry attested at pp. 237, 248, 266, 267, 268 and now on three consecutive leaves in the same direction, and it is still not evidence.** Both boundaries were set from `Cap. N.` headings on the bands.

**★ NEITHER LEAF CARRIES A PRINTER'S OR QUIRE SIGNATURE.** The last was p. 265's (`S. Bonav. — Tom. V.` with quire `34`); the next is still due around p. 273 on the eight-leaf cadence. Nothing on pp. 269–270 was mistaken for an entry.

**Raw-quality grade, per page and per region** (the raw was a cross-check only, never the base): **p. 269 body — good in both columns** (`De dispemalionc`, `quotl`, `rogulariter`, `cmifirmationis`, `Dapti.imus`, `saccrdolalem` in the left; `l'|cclcsiam`, `reparativnm`, `\crbum`, `dis[ionsarcn-tur`, `S;icr;imcnta`, `oims hominis`, `e\, cx intentionc` in the right), the right column noticeably worse than the left and degrading downward — **grade the two columns separately on this leaf.** **p. 269 footer — usable and sound in the sigla** (`\ P Q`, `B`, `\ e(`, `Ex B I 0 P`, `U (i` for *D G*, `\ L`, `Vat., 1 ct 3` all recoverable), **but WRONG in four digits in n. 4 alone** (`d. B.`, `d. o.`, `d. 2.')`, `q. ,S.`) — **the sigla came through where the numerals did not, which is the opposite of p. 268's profile one leaf back.** **p. 270 body — the best of the two leaves** (`quibuscamfjue`, `metlio conslituli`, `slabilito^s`, `aactoritatis`, `Eiira uni-`, `.\egypto`, `Ita flt`, `vita.e`), clean enough to read continuously. **p. 270 footer — good** (`Eccle. 9, 4.` giving the chapter right and the verse wrong, `Libr. IV. de Baptismo` clean). **The grade is stated per region so that the next chunk does not inherit the optimism** — and note that p. 269's footer and p. 268's footer, one leaf apart, failed in *different* categories.

**Runover tests — BOTH OWED TESTS RUN; ONE POSITIVE, ONE NEGATIVE.**
- *p. 269's own gutter — **POSITIVE**, and logged as `p.269 n.4:gutter`.* The left block's last entry, n. 4, **breaks off mid-word and hyphenated** at `De hoc cap. cfr. IV. Sent. d. 6. p. II. a. 2, ubi de in-`, and **p. 269's right block opens UNNUMBERED** with `tentione; d. 5. a. 1. et 2, ubi de ministro baptismi…` — the word *intentione* split across the gutter. Rendered joined in the `p269-4` entry. ★ **`bon-brev-p6-c4` forwarded this test unlogged and declined to close it, having read only the left side; it was closed here from BOTH sides, which is the only way a gutter test closes.** The left side alone would have predicted the right answer for the wrong reason.
- *Page-crossing, p. 269 → p. 270 — **NEGATIVE**, closed from both sides.* p. 269's right block ends **complete** at n. 8's `Vat., 1 et 3 *mediis*.`, and **p. 270's left block opens NUMBERED** at `¹ Eccle. 9, 1. — Inferius pro *alienae* I K L O *alterius*.`
- *FORWARDED UNLOGGED:* **p. 270's own gutter test.** p. 270's left block runs nn. 1–4 and **breaks off inside n. 4 mid-quotation** at `quod « baptismus sit *fundamentum* omnium`, continuing unnumbered at the head of the right block with `Sacramentorum », et quod « ante susceptionem baptismi…` — **so the test is positive, but n. 4 is Cap. VI's and it is `bon-brev-p6-c6`'s to run and log, from both sides.** Not logged here.
- *NOT re-logged here:* `p.268 n.4:gutter` and the p. 268 → p. 269 page-crossing test (both `bon-brev-p6-c4`); `p.267 n.4:gutter` and the p. 267 → p. 268 test (both `p6-c3`); `p.266 n.3:gutter` and the p. 266 → p. 267 test (both `p6-c2`); p. 265's own gutter test and the p. 265 → p. 266 test (both `p6-c1`); the p. 264 → p. 265 test, p. 264's own gutter test and the p. 263 → p. 264 test (all `p5-c10`); and everything on `p6-c1`'s, `p6-c2`'s, `p6-c3`'s and `p6-c4`'s own do-not-re-log lists. Corpus-wide runover and chunk totals are **not written here** — derive them with `tools/check-vol5-census.py`.

**★ WHAT THIS CHUNK FORWARDS TO `bon-brev-p6-c6`.** p. 269 is **fully consumed** — eight notes, eight anchors, nothing left, and its total of 8 is now in `KNOWN_TOTALS`. **p. 270's register was band-read IN FULL and its total of 5 is entered**; this chunk owns nn. 1–2 (both anchoring in the LEFT column, in Cap. V's *Postremo* period), and **nn. 3–5 anchor in Cap. VI in the RIGHT column and are `p6-c6`'s.** Stated with its verification level, claiming nothing more: **the BLOCK positions, the VERBATIM TEXTS and the ANCHOR COLUMN of nn. 3–5 were all read off the bands; the precise anchor WORDS were read for n. 3 only** (`ne fiat contumelia Sacramento ³;`, in Cap. VI's *Thesis 1*), **and no anchor word is claimed for nn. 4–5.**
- n. **3** `August., I. de Baptismo contra Donat. c. 1. n. 2: Nulli enim Sacramento iniuria facienda est.`
- n. **4** `Innocent. III. in C. *Veniens* (3.), X. de presbytero non baptizato (lib. III. tit. 43.) et in C. *Tuae litterae* (1.), X. de clerico per saltum promoto (lib. V. tit. 29.). Primo loco cit. habetur etiam, quod « baptismus sit *fundamentum* omnium` **— and it breaks off there at the foot of the left block, mid-quotation, continuing unnumbered at the head of the right block:** `Sacramentorum », et quod « ante susceptionem baptismi non suscipiatur aliud Sacramentum, quoniam, ubi fundamentum non est, *superaedificari* non potest »; ad quae verba respicitur infra circa finem huius cap. — De hoc cap. cfr. IV. Sent. d. 6. p. I. per totam (praecipue q. 4. et 6.); d. 7. a. 3. q. 3; d. 24. p. II. a. 1. q. 1. seqq.`
- n. **5** `Ed. 1 *servare*, quae etiam superius pro *praemissorum* cum I K L et 2 *praedictorum*. Inferius pro *ex hoc* I K L M *in hoc*.`
★ **EVERY DIGIT AND SIGLUM IN nn. 3–5 ABOVE IS UNVERIFIED** — the decretal coordinates (`lib. III. tit. 43.`, `lib. V. tit. 29.`, the parenthesised `(3.)` and `(1.)`), the chain `d. 6. p. I. … q. 4. et 6.; d. 7. a. 3. q. 3; d. 24. p. II. a. 1. q. 1.`, the runs `I K L` and `I K L M`, and the edition sigla `1` and `2` all come off a single band pass; **the whole `IV. Sent.` chain is a set of live targets that must be checked to exist**, and its `4`s, `6`s and `3`s sit in the `1`/`4` and `3`/`5` risk classes alike. **Re-derive all of it. A hand-off is a claim to re-derive, never a fact to adopt.** `bon-brev-p6-c6` owns p. 270 from n. 3 onward, must run **p. 270's own gutter test** (forwarded UNLOGGED above; positive from the left side but not closed) **and the p. 270 → p. 271 test**, and must extract p. 271 fresh with no constant. Cap. VI (`De Sacramentorum iteratione`) opens ~55 % down p. 270's RIGHT column with a ONE-line subtitle and a `Thesis 1.` gloss; **its end must be set from the `Cap. VII.` heading on the band and from nothing else.**

**Register — Pars VI's vocabulary was FOLLOWED, not re-decided, and the Vol IV settlement was CONSULTED rather than re-argued.** `p6-c1`'s sacramental core, `p6-c2`'s historical-dispensation vocabulary, `p6-c3`'s seven sacrament names off the Vol IV d.1–d.21 settlement (*matrimonium* → "marriage", *nuptiae* kept distinct as "nuptials") and `p6-c4`'s institution vocabulary (*institutio / instituere* → "institution / to institute"; *statuere* → "to establish") all stand unchanged here. This capitulum turns on *dispensatio* and on the minister, and **the Vol IV d.1–d.21 chunks were consulted for every one of those words rather than re-decided**: *dispensator* → "dispenser" (Vol IV d.5–d.6: "it must have a visible dispenser, namely a man, not a spirit"), *minister / ministerium* → "minister / ministry", *dispensare / dispensatio* → "to dispense / dispensation" throughout, *intentio* → "intention" (Vol IV d.6 p.II a.2, *de intentione baptizantis*), *dignus / indignus* → "worthy / unworthy" (Vol IV d.9). **Fixed here** — *ordo sacerdotalis / pontificalis* → "the priestly / pontifical order" (adjectives, not "order of priests"); *in articulo necessitatis* → "in the article of necessity", the canonical phrase kept rather than smoothed to "in an emergency"; *aequitas iuris, dignitas ordinis, securitas salutis* → "the equity of right, the dignity of order, the security of salvation", with *rectitudo iuris* → "the rectitude of right" kept distinct from *aequitas* one line above; *de iure communi* → "so far as pertains to the common law"; *credulitas* → "belief" (of the dispenser's own faith, not "credulity"); *excellentia virtutis* → "the excellence of power" and *indigentia necessitatis* → "the indigence of necessity", the antithesis on which the threefold gradation turns; *media / mediocribus* → "middling", one word for both so that the *maiora / minora / media* triad survives; *iterari* → "to be iterated" (holding the term for Cap. VI, *De Sacramentorum iteratione*, rather than spending "repeated" here); *munus beatae vitae* → "the gift of the blessed life". Quaracchi's em-dash articulations are preserved, and Bonaventure's *quia/cum/ideo* chains are kept as one English sentence throughout — the *Ratio autem* period, the *Rursus* period and the *Postremo* period each run as single sentences, the *Rursus* one across the page break. **The Augustine quotation is translated inside the « » as a quotation, literally and without smoothing**, per the corpus convention for quoted matter.

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