title: Dist. 46, Art. 1, Q. 3

source_text:
<!-- page 960 -->

### Articulus I. *De mitigatione poenae damnatorum.*
### Quaestio III. *Utrum Deus misericordius agat cum uno quam cum alio.*

> **Nota de numeratione notarum.** Quaracchi restarts its footer numbering on every printed page. The apparatus below is therefore labelled by page: notes 3–11 belong to the footer of page 960 (notes 1–2 of that page are anchored in the preceding question), and notes 1–2 to the footer of page 961.

Tertio quaeritur, utrum Deus misericordius agat cum uno quam cum altero. Et quod sic, videtur.

1. Ad Romanos nono[^p960-3]: *Cui vult miseretur, et quem vult indurat:* si ergo misericordius agit cum uno, quem revocat, quam cum eo quem indurat: patet etc.

2. Item, ordo et gradus est in effectibus divinis propter sapientiam, cuius est ordinare[^p960-4]; sed divina misericordia non miseretur nisi sapienter et ordinate: ergo magis uni quam alii.

3. Item, misericordia intuetur miseriam[^p960-5]; sed unus magis est miser quam alter: ergo Deus debet magis misereri unius quam alterius.

4. Item, magis miseretur qui miseriam totam aufert, quam qui temperat[^p960-6]; sed Deus ab aliquibus aufert totam miseriam, aliquibus mitigat: ergo etc.

**Contra:** 1. Actus et effectus respondent habitui sive origini in quolibet[^p960-7]; sed divina misericordia est summa: ergo cuiuscumque miseretur, miseretur in summo.

2. Item, misericordia intuetur miseriam: ergo si magis miseretur alicui, ergo magis misero; sed in futuro magis miser est qui magis peccavit: ergo magis miseretur eius qui magis peccavit. Sed hoc est inconveniens: ergo etc.

3. Item, quia Deus est sapientissimus, ideo facit sapientissime, quidquid facit: ergo[^p960-8] cum sit misericordissimus, misericordissime se habet ad quemlibet: ergo etc.

> **Conclusio.** Respectu effectus sive relevationis a miseria Deus misericordius agit cum uno quam cum altero, tam in praesenti quam in futuro, sed aliter.

**Respondeo:** Dicendum, quod *magis misereri* hoc potest intelligi tripliciter: aut maiori *habitu*, aut *actu*, aut *effectu*. Primo modo et secundo impossibile est; sed tertio modo, scilicet quantum ad effectum, qui est relevatio a miseria, verum est tam in *praesenti* quam in *futuro*[^p960-9]; sed aliter *nunc*, aliter *tunc*: quia nunc *misericordiae* effectus sunt principales, et effectus *iustitiae* sunt annexi; tunc autem effectus iustitiae erunt principales, et misericordiae erunt annexi. *Tunc* enim *reddet Deus secundum opera sua unicuique*[^p960-10], *nunc* autem secundum benignitatem suam. Et ideo simpliciter magis miseretur in *praesenti* eius cui magis vult, in *futuro* magis eius qui magis indiget; unde magis misero plus condonabit secundum quantitatem *absolutam*, non tamen secundum quantitatem *relatam*, ut patebit postea[^p960-11].

<!-- page 961 -->

*Ad 1.* Ad illud ergo quod obiicitur, quod effectus respondet habitui; dicendum, quod verum est in agente inferiori, qui facit omne quod potest; non sic est in Deo[^p961-1].

*Ad 2.* Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod peccator reportat commodum; dicendum, quod falsum est, quia semper sibi remanet poena maior.

*Ad 3.* Ad illud quod obiicitur de sapientia, dicendum, quod non est simile: quia sapientia connotat ordinem, non *effectum absolutum*, ut misericordia[^p961-2].

---

english:
### Article I. *On the mitigation of the punishment of the damned.*
### Question III. *Whether God acts more mercifully with one than with another.*

Thirdly it is asked whether God acts more mercifully with one than with another. And that he does, seems [to be the case].

1. Romans, chapter nine[^p960-3]: *He has mercy on whom he wills, and whom he wills he hardens:* if therefore he acts more mercifully with the one whom he calls back than with him whom he hardens: it is clear, etc.

2. Likewise, there is order and degree in the divine effects on account of wisdom, whose office it is to set in order[^p960-4]; but the divine mercy does not show mercy except wisely and in an ordered way: therefore more to one than to another.

3. Likewise, mercy looks upon misery[^p960-5]; but one man is more miserable than another: therefore God ought to have more mercy on the one than on the other.

4. Likewise, he has more mercy who takes away the whole misery than he who tempers it[^p960-6]; but God takes away the whole misery from some, and mitigates it for others: therefore, etc.

**On the contrary:** 1. Acts and effects correspond in every case to the habit or the origin[^p960-7]; but the divine mercy is supreme: therefore on whomever he has mercy, he has mercy in the supreme degree.

2. Likewise, mercy looks upon misery: therefore if he has more mercy on someone, therefore on one more miserable; but in the future the one who has sinned more is more miserable: therefore he has more mercy on him who has sinned more. But this is unfitting: therefore, etc.

3. Likewise, because God is most wise, therefore he does most wisely whatever he does: therefore[^p960-8], since he is most merciful, he bears himself most mercifully toward everyone: therefore, etc.

> **Conclusion.** With respect to the effect, that is, to the relieving from misery, God acts more mercifully with one than with another, both in the present and in the future, but in different ways.

**I respond:** It must be said that *to have more mercy* can be understood in three ways: either by a greater *habit*, or by a greater *act*, or by a greater *effect*. In the first way and in the second it is impossible; but in the third way, namely as regards the effect, which is the relieving from misery, it is true both in the *present* and in the *future*[^p960-9]; but otherwise *now*, otherwise *then*: because now the effects of *mercy* are the principal ones, and the effects of *justice* are annexed; but then the effects of justice will be the principal ones, and those of mercy will be annexed. For *then God will render to each one according to his works*[^p960-10], but *now* according to his own kindness. And therefore, simply speaking, in the *present* he has more mercy on him whom he loves more, in the *future* more on him who is more in need; whence to the more miserable he will remit more according to the *absolute* quantity, yet not according to the *relative* quantity, as will appear later[^p960-11].

*To 1.* To that, therefore, which is objected, that the effect corresponds to the habit; it must be said that this is true in a lower agent, which does everything it can; it is not so in God[^p961-1].

*To 2.* To that which is objected, that the sinner carries off an advantage; it must be said that this is false, because a greater punishment always remains for him.

*To 3.* To that which is objected concerning wisdom, it must be said that the case is not alike: because wisdom connotes order, not an *absolute effect*, as mercy does[^p961-2].

---

la: Vers. 18: Ergo cuius vult etc. — Inferius pro *uno* codd. G aa (bb a secunda manu) *eo*.

en: Verse 18: "Therefore of whom he will" etc. — Below, in place of *uno*, codices G and aa (bb by a second hand) read *eo*.

la: Aristot., I. Metaph. c. 2: Non enim ordinari, sed ordinare oportet sapientem. Cfr. tom. I. pag. 685, nota 1.

en: Aristotle, *Metaphysics* I, c. 2: "For the wise man must not be ordered, but must order." Compare tom. I, p. 685, note 1.

la: Damasc., II. de Fide orthod. c. 14: Misericordia [est] tristitia in alienis malis [ed. Migne: ob res aliorum adversas]. Gregor., XX. Moral. c. 32. n. 63: *Misericordia* autem a misero corde vocata est, eo quod unusquisque intueatur quempiam miserum... ipse [dolor] cor miserum facit, ut eum a miseria liberet, cui intendit.

en: Damascene, *On the Orthodox Faith* II, c. 14: "Mercy [is] sorrow at the evils of others" [the Migne edition: "over the adversities of others"]. Gregory, *Moralia* XX, c. 32, n. 63: "*Mercy* (misericordia) is so named from a miserable heart (miserum cor), because each one looks upon someone miserable... the grief itself makes the heart miserable, so that it may free from misery him upon whom it is intent."

la: Edd. *quam qui miseriam mitigat*.

en: The editions read *quam qui miseriam mitigat* ("than he who mitigates the misery").

la: Permulti codd. et ed. 1 hoc axioma attribuunt Augustino, voci *Actus* praemittentes *Augustinus*. Praeter verba tom. II. pag. 760, nota 6. allata: Qualis homo est, tales actus habet; si bonus homo est, bonos actus habet etc., cfr. etiam XIV. de Civ. Dei, c. 6, ubi ait: « Interest autem, *qualis* sit voluntas hominis; quia, si perversa est, perversos habebit hos motus; si autem recta est, non solum inculpabiles, verum etiam laudabiles erunt » etc. Vide etiam Aristot., II. Ethic. c. 6, ubi de virtutis habitu docet, ipsum et « id cuius est virtus, bene affectum reddere et opus eius bene efficere » etc. — Pro *effectus* Vat. *affectus;* cod. E legit *Affectus et effectus*.

en: Very many codices and edition 1 attribute this axiom to Augustine, prefixing *Augustinus* to the word *Actus*. Besides the words cited in tom. II, p. 760, note 6: "As a man is, such acts he has; if he is a good man, he has good acts" etc., compare also *City of God* XIV, c. 6, where he says: « But it matters *what sort* the will of a man is; for if it is perverse, it will have these movements perverse; but if it is right, they will be not only blameless but even praiseworthy » etc. See also Aristotle, *Ethics* II, c. 6, where he teaches concerning the habit of virtue that it renders both « the thing whose virtue it is well disposed, and its work well done » etc. — In place of *effectus* the Vatican edition reads *affectus;* codex E reads *Affectus et effectus*.

la: Cod. U *ergo similiter*.

en: Codex U reads *ergo similiter*.

la: Anselm., Proslog. c. 10: Misericors es, non quia tu sentias *affectum*, sed quia nos sentimus *effectum*.

en: Anselm, *Proslogion* c. 10: "You are merciful, not because you feel the *affection*, but because we feel the *effect*."

la: Matth. 16, 27: Et tunc reddet unicuique secundum opera eius. Cfr. Rom. 2, 6.

en: Matthew 16:27: "And then he will render to every man according to his works." Compare Romans 2:6.

la: Quaest. seq.

en: The following question.

la: Cod. aa addit: *Deus enim est agens voluntarius*.

en: Codex aa adds: *Deus enim est agens voluntarius* ("for God is a voluntary agent").

en: See the scholion on the first question of this article. ---

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** Latin re-set from `raw/bonaventure_vol4_raw.txt` L102024–L102144, verified throughout against the 450 dpi column bands `/tmp/colcrop/vol4-p{960,961}-{L,R}-{0,1,2}.png`. Read left column top→bottom, then right column, body bands then footer bands. English translated literally, paragraph-for-paragraph.

**Page span.** Printed pp. 960–961 (PDF 980–981, offset `pdf = printed + 20`). The `QUAESTIO III.` header and its title stand full-width in the upper left column of p. 960, immediately below the close of q. 2 (`… meretur poenam aeternam ²`); the body begins in the left column of p. 960 and the *Conclusio* + *Respondeo* occupy the right column. The chunk's tail (the three replies *ad oppositum*) sits at the very top of p. 961, spanning both columns, above the `QUAESTIO IV.` header.

**Page → apparatus split map.**
- **p. 960** — footer notes **3–11** are claimed here (11 notes total on the page). Notes 1–2 belong to `a1-q2` and are not duplicated. Notes 3–5 sit under the left column, notes 6–11 under the right.
- **p. 961** — footer notes **1–2 only** are claimed here (`non sic est in Deo ¹`, `ut misericordia ²`). Notes 3 onward (3 = `Cfr. quaest. praeced.`, 4 = `Cod. S supplet praemiari.`, 5 = `Vide supra pag. 103, nota 11.`, 6 = `Cfr. supra pag. 916, nota 4.`, and the right-column notes 7+) anchor in `a1-q4` and are **not** claimed here.

**Hand-offs.**
- *Backward, picked up from `a1-q2`:* p. 960 notes 3 and 4 were recorded verbatim in `a1-q2`'s Notes and are rendered here. Its flag that the OCR's `pag. 683, nota J.` in note 4 is wrong is **confirmed against `/tmp/colcrop/vol4-p960-L-2.png`: the band reads `Cfr. tom. I. pag. 685, nota 1.`** — adopted.
- *Forward, to `a1-q4` (L102145–102261, pp. 961–962):* **p. 961 footer notes 3 onward are `a1-q4`'s.** Its body opens at the `QUAESTIO IV.` header / `Quarto quaeritur, utrum Deus agat iustius cum uno quam cum altero`, which begins below this chunk's last reply on p. 961.

**Seam checks.** Opening (`Tertio quaeritur, utrum Deus misericordius agat cum uno quam cum altero`) is continuous with the `QUAESTIO III.` header and matches the *Tertio quaeritur* ordinal for q3. Closing (`… non effectum absolutum, ut misericordia.`) parses complete and is followed on the page by the `QUAESTIO IV.` header — no cascade-merge signature at either seam. The running head at raw L102130, OCR'd `DIST. XLVI. ART. I. QUAEST. IV. 961`, is page furniture marking the top of p. 961; its `QUAEST. IV.` text is the *next* question's running head and does not truncate this chunk.

**OCR-vs-band disagreements resolved at band time (no `[?]` parked).**
- Title line: OCR `Utrum Deus misericordius agal cum %mo quam cum alio` → band `… agat cum uno quam cum alio`.
- Body: OCR `Itera` → `Item`; `ttem` → `Item`; `raiseriam`/`abquibus`/`raitigat` → `miseriam`/`aliquibus`/`mitigat`; `mtseretur` → `miseretur`; `intuelur` → `intuetur`; `raisero` → `misero`; `tripliciler` → `tripliciter`; `Prirao` → `Primo`; `pruesenti`/`vuit` → `praesenti`/`vult`; `Tmic` → `Tunc`; `condonabitsecundum` → `condonabit secundum`; `quantitatera` → `quantitatem`; `plns` → `plus`; `faisum` → `falsum`; `seraper` → `semper`; `effechim absolntum` → `effectum absolutum`; `miserioordia` → `misericordia`; `agenle` → `agente`.
- **Footnote-marker position, note 9:** the OCR places a marker after `magis misereri` (`':`) in the Respondeo. The band shows no marker there; the ⁹ sits after `in *futuro*`. Band adopted, and the OCR's spurious `^` after `in praesenti quam in futuro` in the same clause is the same marker mis-placed once. All 11 p. 960 markers then bind one-to-one.
- Apparatus p. 960 n. 5: OCR `c. li` / `n. dZ` → band `c. 14` / `n. 63`.
- Apparatus p. 960 n. 7: OCR `Snterest`/`volunlas`/`veium`/`beno affe-ctum`/`Ajfectus et effecius` → band `Interest`/`voluntas`/`verum`/`bene affectum`/`Affectus et effectus`.
- Marginal editorial glosses (`Fundamenta.`, `Ad oppositum.`, `Notandum.`, `Conclusio.`, `Distinctio.`, and the clipped `Cor…`/`Dis…` stubs bleeding into the right column) are trimmed as marginalia per CLAUDE.md.

**Scholion.** None in this chunk (`has_scholion: false`). Article I's scholion is printed once at raw L101867 and lives in `a1-q1`; it covers q1–q4. The p. 961 footer note 2 (`Vide scholion ad 1. huius articuli quaest.`) is the editors' own cross-reference to it and is rendered here as apparatus only, not duplicated as a scholion section.

**Bands.** No bands regenerated by this writer. The coordinator re-cut all d.46 bands at the true measured gutter mid-session — **p. 960 @ 2193** (was 2120, itself a correction of the default 1880) and **p. 961 @ 1495**. Both pages were re-read at the corrected split after the first draft was written: **nothing changed.** The p. 961 right-column first characters that the old split had shaved (`portat` / `semper` / `dum,` / `ordinem`) are now fully visible and confirm the reading already reconstructed from the OCR; the p. 960 left-column line-ends and the p. 960 right-column body/footer are identical at 2193 and at 2120.

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


site: bonaventure

collection: Book IV: On the Sacraments

title: Dist. 46, Art. 1, Q. 4

author: St. Bonaventure

languages: en la

title: Opera Omnia (Quaracchi critical edition)

publisher: Collegii S. Bonaventurae

source_text:
<!-- page 961 -->

### Articulus I. *De mitigatione poenae damnatorum.*
### Quaestio IV. *Utrum Deus agat iustius cum uno quam cum altero.*

> The numbered footnotes below are page-qualified, because Quaracchi restarts its footer numbering on every printed page: notes 3–9 belong to printed page 961, notes 1–2 to printed page 962. Notes 1–2 of page 961 are anchored in the preceding question and are rendered there.

Quarto quaeritur, utrum Deus agat iustius cum uno quam cum altero. Et quod *sic*, videtur:

1. Quia, sicut iustitiae est punire, ita misericordiae est parcere: ergo cum magis puniat unum quam alterum, ergo iustius agit cum uno quam cum altero.

2. Item, quantum intenditur misericordia, tantum minuitur rigor iustitiae, et e converso: ergo cum agat misericordius cum uno quam cum altero[^p961-3], ergo et iustius.

3. Item, quantum iste meruit praemiari, tantum iustum est, istum praemiari; sed unus magis meruit[^p961-4] quam alter: ergo iustius est, magis unum praemiari quam alterum. Sed Deus praemiat, secundum quod meruit: ergo iustius praemiat unum quam alterum.

4. Item, demonstratis duobus, quorum unus peccat duplo magis quam alter, qui minus peccavit meruit sex, qui magis peccavit meruit duodecim; tunc esto, quod Dominus remittat duo illi qui minus peccavit, quaero: quantum illi remittit, qui magis peccavit? Si *amplius quam duo*: ergo misericordius agit cum eo qui magis peccavit, et ita reportat commodum de malitia[^p961-5]; quod est inconveniens. Si autem remittit *duo*, arguitur sic: ille punitur plus duplo et non meruit nisi duplo: ergo est magis dignus quatuor, quam ille sit dignus decem, quia ita dignus est sex, sicut ille duodecim: ergo ita quatuor, sicut ille octo: ergo si Deus isti infligit quatuor, illi decem; iustius agit cum illo qui recipit decem.

**Contra:** 1. Quod *non iustius*, videtur: quia, sicut Deus est optimus, ita et iustissimus; sed quia optimus est, optime agit[^p961-6]: ergo quia iustissimus, iustissime.

2. Item, quanto aliquis est iustior, tanto magis accedit ad medium in iudicando[^p961-7]: ergo si est iustissimus, summe accedit ad medium: cum ergo summe, non est ibi magis et minus.

3. Item, sicut Petrus est dignus gloria sua, ita et Linus sua: ergo similiter ex parte poenarum: si ergo considerat dignitatem meritorum, ergo non magis iuste agit cum uno quam cum alio.

### Conclusio

> *Quoad ordinem in remunerando Deus non agit iustius cum uno quam cum alio, sed iustissime cum omnibus; tamen quoad severitatem poenae agit severius cum uno quam cum alio.*

**Respondeo:** Dicendum, quod *iustitia in opere* uno modo dicit *severitatem*, alio modo *ordinem*; sicut et *bene facere* uno modo qualitatem *absolutam*, alio modo *ordinem*. Si *iustitia in opere* dicat *severitatem* sive qualitatem absolutam; dico, quod sic iustius agit cum uno quam cum alio, quia *severius*; et sic *melius* facit unum quam aliud[^p961-8]. — Alio modo iustitia dicit *ordinem praemii* ad meritum; et sic dico, quod iustissime retribuit. Sicut enim quae *producit* optime ordinat, sic in *remunerando* optime et aequissime ordinat praemia ad merita[^p961-9]. — Concedendae igitur sunt duae primae rationes ostendentes, quod iustius agit, quia *severius*.

**Ad argumenta pro parte affirmativa:**

*Ad 3.* Quod vero obiicitur, quod quantum quis meruit, tantum iustum est praemiari; dico, quod concedendum est, et hoc similiter: iustius est, unum praemiari quam alterum, comparando ad idem praemium; unde si Deus tantum praemium daret Petro, quantum Lino; dico, quod iustius agit cum Petro. Sed maius praemium dat Petro et minus Lino, ita quod Petrus non est magis dignus suo praemio quam Linus suo. Quoniam ergo *iustitia* dicit ordinationem secundum diversitatem praemiorum, correspondentem diversitati meritorum; ideo *non iustius* agit cum uno quam cum alio.

*Ad 4.* Ad illud quod obiicitur de remissione, dico, quod si remittit duo ei qui meruit sex, remittit quatuor ei qui meruit duodecim, nec magis remittit *comparando* ad meritum sive ad quantitates diversas, licet *absolute* magis. — Quod ergo dicit, quod reportat commodum; dicendum, quod falsum est, quia semper duplo punitur. Misericordia enim, quando currit cum iustitia, *magis remittit quantitate absoluta*, ubi est maior miseria; sed tamen *aequaliter*, loquendo proportionaliter, quia, sicut uni[^p962-1], ita et alteri.

<!-- page 962 -->

**Ad argumenta pro parte opposita:** Rationes vero ad partem oppositam procedunt de iustitia, secundum quod dicit *ordinem*; et sic, quemadmodum sapientia optime producit secundum ordinem conditionum, ita iustitia iustissime remunerat secundum ordinem retributionum[^p962-2].

---

english:
### Article I. *On the mitigation of the punishment of the damned.*
### Question IV. *Whether God acts more justly with one than with another.*

Fourthly it is asked, whether God acts more justly with one than with another. And that he does *so*, it seems:

1. Because, just as it belongs to justice to punish, so it belongs to mercy to spare: therefore since he punishes one more than another, therefore he acts more justly with one than with another.

2. Likewise, by however much mercy is intensified, by so much is the rigor of justice diminished, and conversely: therefore since he acts more mercifully with one than with another[^p961-3], therefore also more justly.

3. Likewise, by however much this man has merited to be rewarded, by so much is it just that he be rewarded; but one has merited[^p961-4] more than another: therefore it is more just that the one be rewarded more than the other. But God rewards according to what one has merited: therefore he rewards one more justly than the other.

4. Likewise, two men being pointed out, of whom one sins twice as much as the other, the one who sinned less merited six, the one who sinned more merited twelve; then suppose that the Lord remits two to him who sinned less, I ask: how much does he remit to him who sinned more? If *more than two*: therefore he acts more mercifully with him who sinned more, and thus one gains an advantage from wickedness[^p961-5]; which is unfitting. But if he remits *two*, it is argued thus: that man is punished more than double and merited only double: therefore he is more deserving of four than the other is deserving of ten, because he is as deserving of six as that one is of twelve: therefore likewise of four, as that one of eight: therefore if God inflicts four on this one and ten on that one, he acts more justly with him who receives ten.

**On the contrary:** 1. That he does *not* act *more justly*, it seems: because, just as God is best, so also is he most just; but because he is best, he acts in the best way[^p961-6]: therefore because he is most just, he acts most justly.

2. Likewise, the more just anyone is, the more he approaches the mean in judging[^p961-7]: therefore if he is most just, he approaches the mean in the highest degree: since, therefore, in the highest degree, there is no more and less there.

3. Likewise, just as Peter is worthy of his glory, so also is Linus of his: therefore likewise on the side of punishments: if therefore he considers the worth of merits, therefore he does not act more justly with one than with another.

### Conclusion

> *As regards order in rewarding, God does not act more justly with one than with another, but most justly with all; nevertheless, as regards severity of punishment, he acts more severely with one than with another.*

**I respond:** It must be said that *justice in a work* in one way says *severity*, in another way *order*; just as *to act well* in one way says an *absolute* quality, in another way *order*. If *justice in a work* says *severity*, or an absolute quality, I say that in this way he acts more justly with one than with another, because *more severely*; and thus he makes one thing *better* than another[^p961-8]. — In the other way justice says the *order of reward* to merit; and in this way I say that he requites most justly. For just as he orders in the best way the things which he *produces*, so in *rewarding* he orders rewards to merits in the best and most equitable way[^p961-9]. — The first two arguments are therefore to be conceded, which show that he acts more justly because *more severely*.

**To the arguments for the affirmative side:**

*To 3.* As for what is objected, that by however much anyone has merited, by so much is it just that he be rewarded; I say that it is to be conceded, and this likewise: it is more just that the one be rewarded than the other, in comparison to the same reward; whence if God were to give as great a reward to Peter as to Linus, I say that he acts more justly with Peter. But he gives a greater reward to Peter and a lesser to Linus, so that Peter is not more worthy of his reward than Linus of his. Since therefore *justice* says an ordering according to the diversity of rewards, corresponding to the diversity of merits; therefore he does *not* act *more justly* with one than with another.

*To 4.* To that which is objected concerning remission, I say that if he remits two to him who merited six, he remits four to him who merited twelve, nor does he remit more *in comparison* to merit or to the diverse quantities, although *absolutely* more. — As for what he says, that one gains an advantage; it must be said that it is false, because he is always punished double. For mercy, when it runs together with justice, *remits more in absolute quantity* where there is greater misery; but nevertheless *equally*, speaking proportionally, because, as to the one[^p962-1], so also to the other.

**To the arguments for the opposite side:** But the arguments for the opposite side proceed concerning justice according as it says *order*; and thus, just as wisdom produces in the best way according to the order of created conditions, so justice rewards most justly according to the order of retributions[^p962-2].

---

la: Cfr. quaest. praeced.

en: Cf. the preceding question.

la: Cod. S supplet *praemiari*.

en: Codex S supplies *praemiari*.

la: Vide supra pag. 103, nota 11.

en: See above, p. 103, note 11.

la: Cfr. supra pag. 916, nota 4.

en: Cf. above, p. 916, note 4.

la: Vide Aristot., V. *Ethic.* c. 3.

en: See Aristotle, *Ethics* V, c. 3.

la: Quia, ut ait August. *83 Qq.* q. 41, non essent omnia [i. e. rerum genera], si essent aequalia.

en: Because, as Augustine says in the *83 Questions*, q. 41, all things [i.e. the kinds of things] would not exist, if they were equal.

la: Cfr. Dionys., *de Div. Nom.* c. 8. § 7. seqq. — Inferius pro *quia severius* plures codd. et ed. 1 *quam severius*; cod. K (1 a secunda manu) legit: *quod tam iustius agit, quam severius*.

en: Cf. Dionysius, *On the Divine Names* c. 8, § 7 ff. — Below, in place of *quia severius* several codices and edition 1 read *quam severius*; codex K (1, by a second hand) reads: *that he acts as much more justly as more severely*.

la: A codd. K Y additur *partem*.

en: By codices K and Y *partem* is added.

la: Vide scholion ad 1. huius articuli quaest.

en: See the scholion to question 1 of this article. ---

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** Latin re-set from `raw/bonaventure_vol4_raw.txt` L102145–L102261 (IA djvu OCR), with every damaged region (title line, Conclusio, Respondeo, both footer blocks) verified against the 450 dpi column bands `/tmp/colcrop/vol4-p961-{L,R}-{0,1,2}.png` and `vol4-p962-{L,R}-{0,1,2}.png`.

**Column-split correction (coordinator, mid-session).** The default `1880` gutter is wrong for d.46; the true gutter alternates by page parity. Bands were regenerated by the coordinator at **p.961 @ 1495** and **p.962 @ 2167**, and the entire body and apparatus of this chunk were re-verified against them. **Nothing changed.** The first pass had reconstructed the clipped right-column line-openings of p.961 (`portat commodum`, `Quoad`, `uno modo`, `severitatem`, `verius`, `nerando`, `merita`, `cedendum`) from OCR context, and the corrected bands confirm every one of those readings letter-for-letter, along with p.961 footers 7–9 and p.962 footers 1–2. No band was regenerated by this agent.

**No scholion.** Articulus I's scholion is printed at a1-q1 (raw L101867) and covers q1–q4. Nothing scholion-like is printed in this range; `has_scholion: false` is correct.

**Page → apparatus split map.**
- **p.961 has 9 footer notes** (1–6 in the footer's left column, 7–9 in the right). Body anchors, verified glyph-by-glyph on the bands:
  - notes **1–2** → the *preceding* chunk `a1-q4`'s neighbour `a1-q3` (anchors `non sic est in Deo¹` and `ut misericordia²`, both in a1-q3's tail at the top of p.961 left column). **Not claimed here.**
  - notes **3–9** → this chunk (7 entries).
- **p.962**: my body carries only the first two anchors of that page (`sicut uni¹` and `ordinem retributionum²`). Notes **1–2** claimed here; **notes 3–11 of p.962 are forwarded to `a2-q1`** (they are Articulus II material and sit at raw L102324–L102336).
- Total apparatus in this file: **9 entries.**

**Band-vs-OCR disagreements resolved at band time** (no `[?]` parked):
- Title line: OCR `Ulnmi` → band reads **`Utrum`**.
- p.961 note 6: OCR `nota i` → band reads **`nota 4`**.
- p.961 note 9: OCR `§ 1` → band reads **`§ 7`**.
- p.961 note 5: band confirms `pag. 103, nota 11` as printed (an odd back-reference, but it is what the page prints).
- Argument 2's marker: OCR renders it `'`; band shows superscript **3**. Same class of glyph confusion at `meruit⁴`, `malitia⁵`, `agit⁶`, `iudicando⁷`.

**Seam checks.**
- *Backward (a1-q3, shared p.961):* my opener `Quarto quaeritur, utrum Deus agat iustius…` sits directly under the `QUAESTIO IV.` header on the band and is continuous — the ordinal *Quarto* matches quaestio 4. The p.961 split was derived independently from the bands, per the dispatch; it should agree with a1-q3's own derivation that it owns notes 1–2.
- *Forward (a2-q1):* my closing sentence `…ita iustitia iustissime remunerat secundum ordinem retributionum².` parses and completes. `ARTICULUS II.` opens cleanly below it on the band; none of Art. II's opener bleeds into this chunk's tail.

**Marginalia trimmed** per CLAUDE.md: `Distinctio duplex.`, `Conclusio 1.`, `Conclusio 2.`, `Ad argg. pro parte affirm.`, `Notandum.`, and the (partly clipped) left-column glosses are editorial marginalia and are not rendered.

**Page-break placement.** The printed p.961/962 break falls mid-paragraph inside reply *Ad 4* (`…remittit qua- | tuor ei qui meruit duodecim`). Per corpus convention the `<!-- page 962 -->` comment is placed at the next clean paragraph boundary (before the reply to the opposite side) rather than splitting the reply.

**`[?]` flags:** none.

method: LLM-assisted translation from the Quaracchi Latin, verified chunk-by-chunk against the printed plates (apparatus roster, cross-references, page/gutter boundaries).

license_source: Public Domain Mark 1.0

license_translation: CC BY-NC 4.0

license_apparatus: CC BY-NC 4.0


title: Dist. 46, Art. 2, Q. 1

source_text:
<!-- page 962 -->

### Articulus II. *Quomodo misericordia et veritas eandem respiciant operationem.*

Consequenter quantum ad secundum articulum quaeritur, quomodo misericordia et veritas eandem respiciant operationem. Et circa hoc quaeruntur quatuor.

Primo quaeritur, utrum in aliquo opere Domini sit misericordia et veritas.

Secundo, utrum in eodem opere Domini sit misericordia et veritas.

Et dato, quod in eodem, secundum quod misericordia et veritas dicuntur largissime, tertio quaeritur, utrum secundum quod proprie accipiuntur, concurrant in eodem.

Quarto, utrum misericordia et veritas possint ab invicem in aliquo opere separari.

### Quaestio I. *Utrum in aliquo opere Domini sit misericordia et veritas.*

> The numbered footnotes below correspond to markers in both the Latin body above and the English translation. Quaracchi restarts its footer numbering on every printed page, so the markers here are page-qualified: notes 3 through 11 of printed page 962, and notes 1 through 4 of printed page 963.

Quantum ad primum proceditur sic, et ostenditur, quod in *aliquo* opere Domini sit

1. *Misericordia*, Lucae sexto[^p962-3]: *Estote misericordes, sicut et Pater vester misericors est*: ergo etc.

2. Item, in Psalmo[^p962-4]: *Reddes unicuique iuxta opera sua*; sed hoc est *iustitiae*: ergo etc.

3. Item, *ista duo* decorant rectorem, unde Proverbiorum vigesimo[^p962-5]: *Misericordia et veritas custodiunt regem, et clementia* etc.; sed Deus est rector omnium rerum: ergo etc.

4. Item, *ratione* videtur: quia istae sunt duae virtutes in nobis: ergo habent exemplaria in Deo[^p962-6]; et si hoc: ergo cum nos operemur iuste et misericorditer, ergo et Deus similiter.

**Contra:**

1. Damascenus[^p962-7]: « *Misericordia* est compassio de alienis malis »; sed Deus nihil operatur ex compassione, quia non compatitur: ergo in nullo opere eius concurrit misericordia.

2. Item, *iustitia* est, cum fit quod *debet* fieri[^p962-8]; sed Deus nihil operatur ex *debito*, quia nulli est obnoxius: ergo nihil iuste, et sic etc.

3. Item, si *misericordia* et *veritas* est conditio Dei operantis; cum ergo conditio operantis reluceat in opere, ut patet — quia enim bonus est, ideo bona sunt facta[^p962-9] — ergo pari ratione, quia iustus est, omnia facta sunt iusta: ergo et lapis iustus, et lapis misericors est. Quod si non conceditur: ergo nec Deus operatur secundum misericordiam, aut veritatem.

4. Item, nihil ponendum est in Deo, quod non debeat poni in summo; sed iustitia non debet poni in aliquo in summo, unde Ecclesiastis septimo[^p962-10]: *Noli esse multum iustus*.

### Conclusio

> *In operibus Dei est misericordia et veritas.*

**Respondeo:** Dicendum, quod misericordia et veritas est[^p962-11] in opere creaturae rationalis; et hoc quidem nobilitatis est: ergo multo fortius et nobilius in operibus Dei.

*Ad 1. 2.* Ad illud ergo quod primo obiicitur quod in Deo non cadit compassio nec debitum; dicendum,

<!-- page 963 -->

quod misericordia et veritas sive iustitia — quia veritas pro iustitia accipitur[^p963-1] — in *creatura* duo dicunt, scilicet *effluxum bonitatis* in alterum secundum merita, vel supra, et in eo qui effluit, *compassionem*, vel *debitum*; et *primum* quidem *nobilitatis* est, *secundum* vero *imperfectionis* est. Et quia omne quod *nobilitatis* est, Deo attribuendum est, quod vero *imperfectionis* est non est ei attribuendum; ideo est in eo misericordia et iustitia quantum ad *primum*, sicut probant rationes primae; non quantum ad *secundum*, sicut probant rationes sequentes.

*Ad 3.* Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod tunc omnia opera Dei deberent dici *iusta*; dicendum, quod est conditio operantis, quae respicit ipsum secundum *naturam*, et est conditio, quae respicit ipsum secundum *actum*; « *bonum* enim respicit naturam, ut dicit Boethius in libro de Hebdomadibus[^p963-2], sed *iustum* dicit actum ». Conditio ergo illa, quae respicit *naturam* operantis, communicatur rei productae, ut Dei natura bona, et natura operati bona. Sed conditio, quae respicit *actum*, communicatur non in natura *rei productae*, sed ipsi *productioni*; unde cum Deus sit iustus, non oportet, quod omnis *creatura* vel *factum* sit iustum, sed quod ipsa *factio* sit iusta. Et sic patet illud.

Et ex hoc patet illud quod consuevit quaeri, quare *misericordia vel veritas* magis dicatur conditio operis divini quam *bonitas vel potentia*. Dico enim, quod illa respiciunt *naturam*, sed ista respiciunt *actum*; et ideo non tantum *conditiones operis*, sed etiam *viae Domini* appellantur in Psalmo[^p963-3]: *Universae* etc.

*Ad 4.* Ad illud quod obiicitur ultimo de termino, dicendum, quod terminus in summitate alicuius potest attendi propter *excessum*, vel propter *accessum ad medium*. Et primum in iustitia reprehenditur, secundum commendatur[^p963-4]; et ratione huius dicitur *iustissimus*, non ratione primi.

english:
### Article II. *How mercy and truth regard the same operation.*

Next, as to the second article it is asked how mercy and truth regard the same operation. And concerning this four things are asked.

First it is asked whether in any work of the Lord there are mercy and truth.

Second, whether in the same work of the Lord there are mercy and truth.

And granted that they are in the same work, insofar as mercy and truth are said most broadly, third it is asked whether, insofar as they are taken properly, they concur in the same work.

Fourth, whether mercy and truth can be separated from one another in any work.

### Question I. *Whether in any work of the Lord there are mercy and truth.*

As to the first the procedure is as follows, and it is shown that in *some* work of the Lord there is

1. *Mercy*, Luke six[^p962-3]: *Be merciful, as your Father also is merciful*: therefore etc.

2. Likewise, in the Psalm[^p962-4]: *Thou wilt render to every man according to his works*; but this belongs to *justice*: therefore etc.

3. Likewise, *these two* adorn a ruler, whence Proverbs twenty[^p962-5]: *Mercy and truth preserve the king, and clemency* etc.; but God is the ruler of all things: therefore etc.

4. Likewise, it is seen *by reason*: because these are two virtues in us: therefore they have their exemplars in God[^p962-6]; and if this is so: then, since we work justly and mercifully, therefore God likewise.

**On the contrary:**

1. Damascene[^p962-7]: « *Mercy* is compassion over another's evils »; but God works nothing out of compassion, because He does not suffer with another: therefore in no work of His does mercy concur.

2. Likewise, there is *justice* when what *ought* to be done is done[^p962-8]; but God works nothing out of *debt*, because He is bound to no one: therefore He does nothing justly, and so on.

3. Likewise, if *mercy* and *truth* are a condition of God working; since, then, the condition of the one working shines out in the work, as is plain — for because He is good, therefore the things made are good[^p962-9] — therefore by parity of reasoning, because He is just, all things made are just: therefore even a stone is just, and a stone is merciful. But if this is not granted: then neither does God work according to mercy or truth.

4. Likewise, nothing is to be posited in God which ought not to be posited in the highest degree; but justice ought not to be posited in anything in the highest degree, whence Ecclesiastes seven[^p962-10]: *Be not overmuch just*.

### Conclusion

> *In the works of God there are mercy and truth.*

**Respondeo:** It must be said that mercy and truth are[^p962-11] in the work of the rational creature; and this indeed belongs to nobility: therefore much more strongly and more nobly are they in the works of God.

*Ad 1, 2.* To that, then, which is objected first, that in God there falls neither compassion nor debt; it must be said

<!-- page 963 -->

that mercy and truth, or justice — since truth is taken here for justice[^p963-1] — say two things in the *creature*, namely an *outflow of goodness* upon another according to merits, or above them, and, in him who pours forth, *compassion* or *debt*; and the *first* indeed belongs to *nobility*, but the *second* belongs to *imperfection*. And because everything that belongs to *nobility* is to be attributed to God, whereas what belongs to *imperfection* is not to be attributed to Him; therefore there are in Him mercy and justice as regards the *first*, as the first arguments prove; not as regards the *second*, as the following arguments prove.

*Ad 3.* To that which is objected, that then all the works of God would have to be called *just*; it must be said that there is a condition of the one working which regards him according to *nature*, and there is a condition which regards him according to *act*; « for *the good* regards nature, as Boethius says in the book *On the Hebdomads*[^p963-2], but *the just* bespeaks act ». That condition, therefore, which regards the *nature* of the one working is communicated to the thing produced, as God's nature is good and the nature of what is worked is good. But the condition which regards *act* is communicated not in the nature of *the thing produced*, but to the *production* itself; whence, since God is just, it is not necessary that every *creature* or *thing made* be just, but that the *making* itself be just. And thus that is plain.

And from this is plain that which is customarily asked, why *mercy or truth* is said to be a condition of the divine work rather than *goodness or power*. For I say that the latter regard *nature*, but the former regard *act*; and therefore they are called not only *conditions of the work*, but also *the ways of the Lord* in the Psalm[^p963-3]: *All the ways* etc.

*Ad 4.* To that which is objected last concerning the limit, it must be said that a limit at the summit of anything can be regarded on account of *excess*, or on account of *approach to the mean*. And the first is reproved in justice, the second commended[^p963-4]; and by reason of this one is called *most just*, not by reason of the first.

la: Vers. 36: Estote ergo misericordes etc.

en: Verse 36: *Be ye therefore merciful* etc.

la: Psalm. 61, 13. — Edd. *Item, quod in omni opere Domini sit iustitia seu veritas, videtur per illud Psalmi.*

en: Psalm 61:13. — The editions read: *Likewise, that in every work of the Lord there is justice or truth is seen from that saying of the Psalm.*

la: Vers. 28: Misericordia... regem, et roboratur clementia thronus eius.

en: Verse 28: *Mercy... the king, and his throne is strengthened by clemency.*

la: Cfr. 1. Sent. d. 36. a. 3. q. 1. in corp.

en: Cf. I *Sent.* d. 36 a. 3 q. 1, in the body.

la: Libr. II. de Fide orthod. c. 14. Cfr. supra pag. 960, nota 5.

en: Book II *On the Orthodox Faith* c. 14. Cf. above, p. 960, note 5.

la: Iustitiae enim est reddere unicuique quod suum est. Cfr. tom. III. pag. 728, nota 1. — Infra pro *iuste* cod. P *ex iustitia*.

en: For it belongs to justice to render to each what is his own. Cf. tom. III, p. 728, note 1. — Below, for *iuste* codex P reads *ex iustitia*.

la: Gen. 1, 31: Et erant [quae fecerat Deus] valde bona. — August., l. de Doctr. christian. c. 32. n. 35: Quia enim [Deus] bonus est, sumus; et in quantum sumus, boni sumus. — Superius pro *est conditio* cod. E *sunt conditiones*.

en: Gen. 1:31: *And [the things which God had made] were very good.* — Augustine, book *On Christian Doctrine* c. 32 n. 35: "For because [God] is good, we are; and insofar as we are, we are good." — Above, for *est conditio* codex E reads *sunt conditiones*.

la: Vers. 17.

en: Verse 17.

la: Cod. E *sunt*. Mox pro *creaturae* cod. bb *naturae*.

en: Codex E reads *sunt*. Shortly after, for *creaturae* codex bb reads *naturae*.

la: August., Enarrat. in Ps. 24, 10: *Universae viae Domini misericordia et veritas*, n. 10: Quorum unum praebuit donando peccata, alterum merita *iudicando*.

en: Augustine, *Expositions on the Psalms*, on Ps. 24:10: *All the ways of the Lord are mercy and truth*, n. 10: "Of which He furnished the one by forgiving sins, the other by *judging* merits."

la: Sive in libro, cui titulus: « Quomodo substantiae in eo, quod sint, bonae sint, cum non sint substantialia bona »: Secundum hanc igitur rationem cuncta oportet esse iusta, quoniam ipse iustus est, qui ea esse voluit. Ne hoc quidem, nam *bonum esse* essentiam, *iustum* vero *esse* actum respicit etc. Cfr. I. Sent. d. 1. dub. 13. et 14. — Paulo inferius post *ut* in cod. E secunda manus addidit *si*. Subinde pro *factio sit* cod. M *actio sit*, plures alii codd. et Vat. *facta sit* (Vat. *sint*).

en: Or rather in the book whose title is: "How substances are good in that they are, though they are not substantial goods": "According to this reasoning, then, all things must be just, since He Himself is just who willed them to be. Not even this, for *to be good* regards essence, whereas *to be just* regards act" etc. Cf. I *Sent.* d. 1 dub. 13 and 14. — A little below, after *ut*, a second hand in codex E added *si*. Thereupon, for *factio sit* codex M reads *actio sit*, several other codices and the Vatican edition *facta sit* (Vat. *sint*).

la: Hieron., Comment. in Eccl. 7, 17, allato verbo Domini [Luc. 6, 37]: *Nolite iudicare, ut non iudicemini*, dicit, quod « inhumana iustitia est fragilitati conditionis hominum non ignoscens. *Noli* ergo *esse iustus multum*, quia *pondus* grande *et pondus* parvum *abominatio coram Domino* [Prov. 20, 23.]. Unde et apud philosophos virtutes in meditullio positae sunt, et omne quod nimis est, sive sursum sive deorsum, reputatur in vitio ». Cfr. Aristot., II. Ethic. c. 6.

en: Jerome, *Commentary on Ecclesiastes* 7:17, having cited the word of the Lord [Luke 6:37]: *Judge not, that you be not judged*, says that "a justice which does not pardon the frailty of the human condition is inhuman. *Be not*, therefore, *overmuch just*, because *a great weight and a small weight are an abomination before the Lord* [Prov. 20:23]. Whence among the philosophers too the virtues are placed in the middle, and everything that is excessive, whether upward or downward, is reckoned a vice." Cf. Aristotle, *Ethics* II c. 6. ---

latin_scholion:
**I.** Multas quaestiones de attributis divinis iustitiae et misericordiae solvit S. Thomas (hic q. 1. et 2.); cfr. etiam Sum. I. q. 21. a. 1-4; item Alex. Hal., S. p. 1. q. 39. per totam; Scot., hic q. 1-3. — Nemini dubium esse potest, in Deo esse, quidquid perfectionis est in proprietatibus iustitiae et misericordiae, econtra ab eo amovendum esse quod sonat in imperfectionem (q. 1. ad 1.). Attamen in applicanda hac regula ad *diversas iustitiae species* (ut sunt *legalis*, *distributiva*, *vindicativa* et praesertim *commutativa*), utrum et quomodo sint in Deo, non eadem via speculative procedunt theologi. — Auctor noster distinguit triplicem sensum utriusque termini, scil. iustitiae et misericordiae; porro docet, *large* loquendo, utramque esse in omnibus Dei operibus (q. 1. 2.), sed *proprie* loquendo, esse tum in iustificatione (q. 3.) tum in remuneratione (q. 4). — Quoad 4. quaestionem antiqui doctores, imprimis Alex. Hal., Ss. Thom. et Bonav. docent, Deum etiam in damnatis punire citra condignum (cfr. et supra a. 1. q. 2, d. 15. p. 1. dub. 1; S. Thom., hic q. 2. a. 2; S. I. q. 21. a. 4. ad 1.); Estius autem (hic § 4.) multis argumentis probare nititur, oppositam sententiam, iam a Magistro (c. 3.) relatam, esse saltem probabilem. — Quatuor quaestiones auctoris nostri non ita ab aliis distinguuntur, sed tamen in re omnes idem fere docent.

De toto 2. articulo: Alex. Hal., loc. cit. m. 3. a. 4. — Scot., hic q. 4. — S. Thom., hic praecipue q. 1. a. 1, q. 2. a. 2. — B. Albert., hic a. 5. — Petr. a Tar., hic q. 3. a. 1, q. 2. a. 2. — Richard. a Med., hic a. 2. q. 3. — Durand., hic q. 1. — Dionys. Carth., hic q. 3.

---

english_scholion:
**I.** Many questions concerning the divine attributes of justice and mercy St. Thomas resolves (here q. 1 and 2); cf. also *Summa* I q. 21 a. 1–4; likewise Alexander of Hales, S. p. 1 q. 39 throughout; Scotus, here q. 1–3. — It can be doubtful to no one that there is in God whatever of perfection is in the properties of justice and mercy, and conversely that what sounds of imperfection is to be removed from Him (q. 1 ad 1). Nevertheless in applying this rule to the *diverse species of justice* (such as *legal*, *distributive*, *vindicative* and especially *commutative*), whether and how they are in God, theologians do not proceed speculatively by the same road. — Our author distinguishes a threefold sense of each term, namely of justice and of mercy; he further teaches that, speaking *broadly*, each is in all the works of God (q. 1, 2), but, speaking *properly*, that they are both in justification (q. 3) and in remuneration (q. 4). — As to the fourth question the ancient doctors, especially Alexander of Hales, Saints Thomas and Bonaventure, teach that God punishes even the damned short of what is condign (cf. also above a. 1 q. 2; d. 15 p. 1 dub. 1; St. Thomas, here q. 2 a. 2; S. I q. 21 a. 4 ad 1); Estius however (here § 4) strives by many arguments to prove that the opposite opinion, already reported by the Master (c. 3), is at least probable. — The four questions of our author are not distinguished from the others in this way, yet in substance they all teach nearly the same thing.

On the whole of the 2nd article: Alexander of Hales, loc. cit. m. 3 a. 4. — Scotus, here q. 4. — St. Thomas, here especially q. 1 a. 1, q. 2 a. 2. — Blessed Albert, here a. 5. — Peter of Tarentaise, here q. 3 a. 1, q. 2 a. 2. — Richard of Middleton, here a. 2 q. 3. — Durandus, here q. 1. — Dionysius the Carthusian, here q. 3.

---

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** Latin re-set from `raw/bonaventure_vol4_raw.txt` L102262–L102399, verified against 450 dpi column bands `/tmp/colcrop/vol4-p96{2,3}-{L,R}-{0,1,2}.png`, read left column top→bottom then right column, body bands then footer bands. The OCR cascade-shatters the *Conclusio*, the *Respondeo*, the *Ad 3* solution and every footer here; in those regions the band read is authoritative and was used.

**Bands.** Read twice. First pass used bands regenerated by this agent (`colcrop.py vol4 962 2120 3 1.15`, `... vol4 963 2120 3 1.15`) because the stock bands were clipped at the right edge of the left column. The coordinator then regenerated both pages at the true measured gutters (p.962 @ 2167, p.963 @ 1577) and this chunk's Latin body, scholion and apparatus were **re-verified line-by-line against those corrected bands**. The corrected bands changed **nothing** in this chunk — no right-column first characters and no left-column line-ends were found to differ from the first-pass reading. Marker numbers, footer text and the scholion were confirmed identical.

**Praenotata claimed.** This chunk folds the `ARTICULUS II.` opener (raw L102262–L102273) — its title *Quomodo misericordia et veritas eandem respiciant operationem* and its four-question listing (*Primo… Secundo… tertio… Quarto…*, raw L102266–L102272) — together with `QUAESTIO I.`, per the Vol II/IV convention that a short article opener is folded into that article's q1. The listing is rendered in full in both languages; nothing between the article header and the QUAESTIO header is dropped.

**Question title.** Verified from the line after the QUAESTIO header (raw L102279; bands `vol4-p962-L-1.png` + `-R-1.png`): *Utrum in aliquo opere Domini sit misericordia et veritas*. Matches the skeleton's `title_la`; no correction needed.

**Page → apparatus split map (13 entries claimed).**

| Printed page | Footer notes on page | Claimed here | Disposition of the rest |
|---|---|---|---|
| 962 | 1–11 | **3–11** (9) | Notes **1–2 → `a1-q4`**. This chunk's first body anchor is superscript **3** (*Lucae sexto ³*), so 1–2 anchor above the ARTICULUS II header. |
| 963 | 1–5 | **1–4** (4) | Note **5 → `a2-q2`**, anchored at *…principale significatum sint idem ⁵* (raw L102409, band `vol4-p963-R-2.png`). |

Markers were bound by note *content*, not by position; here the sequence happens to run in order (3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11 | 1,2,3,4).

**Cross-check against `a1-q4` (independent agreement).** `a1-q4` derived p.962 independently from the corrected bands and reports: 11 footer notes on p.962, it claims 1–2 (anchoring *sicut uni ¹* and *retributionum ²*), forwarding 3–11. **This agrees exactly with the split derived here.** No disagreement to chase.

**Hand-off — backward (to `a1-q4`).** p. 962 notes 1 (`A codd. K Y additur partem.`) and 2 (`Vide scholion ad 1. huius articuli quaest.`) are **not** claimed here; `a1-q4` holds them. Note 2 was flagged in dispatch as possibly belonging to this chunk — band evidence says otherwise. It is an apparatus cross-reference ("See the scholion to question 1 of this article"), *not* a scholion header. Caution recorded by the coordinator: the same phrasing also occurs as p.961 note 2 (belonging to `a1-q3`); this chunk claims **neither** occurrence, so there is no double-claim from this side.

**Hand-off — forward (to `a2-q2`).** p. 963 note 5 (`Cod. K (l a secunda manu) Deus pro idem. Cfr. hic lit. Magistri, c. 3.`) belongs to `a2-q2`. Also: `a2-q2` opens at raw L102400 with `QUAESTIO II.`; its opener *Secundo quaeritur, utrum in eodem opere Domini sit misericordia et veritas* is **not** duplicated here.

**Scholion.** The Article II `SCHOLION.` (raw L102368–L102395, printed p. 963, spanning the full page width beneath the body) is held by this chunk in full. It covers all four questions of Art. II, so `a2-q2`, `a2-q3` and `a2-q4` legitimately render no scholion — a missing scholion in those siblings is not an error. Placed as the **last** subsection of both the `## Latin` and `## English` blocks, per the parser requirement.

**Running head.** `DIST. XLVI. ART. II. QUAEST. II. 963` (raw L102342) sits inside this chunk's raw range but is page furniture marking the top of printed p. 963; its `QUAEST. II.` text is the next question's head bleeding in and does **not** truncate this chunk. The `<!-- page 963 -->` break is placed at the *Ad 1. 2.* / *quod misericordia et veritas sive iustitia* boundary, where the printed page actually turns.

**Seam continuity.** Opening: *Consequenter quantum ad secundum articulum…* — a fresh article opener, grammatically complete; the prior chunk (`a1-q4`) closes at *…sed tamen aequaliter… secundum ordinem retributionum* (raw L102257), which parses on its own. Closing: *…et ratione huius dicitur iustissimus, non ratione primi.* — parses; the scholion follows, then q2 begins cleanly at its own header. No cascade-merge signature found.

**Band-vs-OCR disagreements resolved at band time (not parked as flags).**
- OCR `C N C L U S 1 0.` (L102302) → `CONCLUSIO.`; `miserieordia` (L102305) → `misericordia`.
- OCR letter-substitution garbles corrected against the bands: `iustilia`→`iustitia`, `operalionem`→`operationem`, `quaerilur`→`quaeritur`, `dicunlur`→`dicuntur`, `crealura`→`creatura`, `honilatis`→`bonitatis`, `nohititatis`→`nobilitatis`, `dehitum`→`debitum`, `palet`→`patet`, `aclum`→`actum`, `mediim`→`medium`, `commendalur`→`commendatur`, `m-stissimus`→`iustissimus`, `iapis`→`lapis`, `noiiilius`→`nobilius`, `nulio`→`nullo`, `condilio`→`conditio`, `cadil`→`cadit`, `oporlet`→`oportet`, `natii-ram`→`naturam`, `raliones`→`rationes`, `islae`→`istae`, `verilas`/`rilas`→`veritas`/`ritas`, `nobilitalis`→`nobilitatis`, `flt`→`fit`.
- Word-level: `Qiprimum` (L102348) → `et primum`; `efiQuit` (L102347) → `effluit`; `in aliquosummo` (L102298) → `in aliquo in summo`.
- Scholion: `MuUas`→`Multas`, `Tliomns`→`Thomas`, `Ale.t. Hal.`→`Alex. Hal.`, `imprimfs`→`imprimis`, `Dco`→`Deo`, `ila`→`ita`, `ideni fere docenl`→`idem fere docent`, `q. 21. a. l-i`→`q. 21. a. 1-4`, `S. I. q. 21. a. i. ad I.`→`S. I. q. 21. a. 4. ad 1.`, `Estius autem (liic § i.)`→`(hic § 4.)`, Scotus `hic q. i.`→`hic q. 4.`
- Apparatus openers were digit-mangled in the OCR (`s`=8, `°`=9, `1»`=10, `"`=11, `^`=2, `*`=4) and were resolved against the printed footer blocks.

**Marginal glosses trimmed** (editorial marginalia, not Bonaventure's text): p. 962 `Fundamenta.`, `Ad oppositum.`, `Conclusio.`, `Solutio ad opposita.`; p. 963 `Conditio duplex notanda.`, `Ad oppositum solutio.`, `Quaest. incid. solvitur.`, `Notandum.` These bleed inline in the OCR (`Foniameuii.`, `soi ''"^'`, `icHo`, `ooaest. tor.`, `Notandam`) and were removed.

**`[?]` flags:** none. Every reading in this chunk was legible in the 450 dpi bands.

**Anchor count check:** Latin `[^` anchors = 13; English `[^` anchors = 13; apparatus definitions = 13. Matched.


title: Dist. 46, Art. 2, Q. 2

source_text:
<!-- page 963 -->

### Quaestio II. *Utrum in eodem opere Domini sit misericordia et veritas.*

> The numbered notes below are Quaracchi's page footers. Quaracchi restarts its footnote numbering on every printed page, so the markers here are page-qualified: note 5 of page 963, and notes 1–6 of page 964. Notes 1–4 of page 963 are anchored in the preceding quaestio and are printed there; note 7 of page 964 is anchored in the following quaestio.

Secundo quaeritur, utrum in *eodem* opere Domini sit misericordia et veritas. Et quod non, videtur:

1. Quia in nobis est alius effectus misericordiae, ut *parcere*; alius effectus iustitiae, ut *punire*: ergo si a nobis transfertur ad Deum, videtur, quod similiter sit in Deo, cum hoc non repugnet divinae simplicitati.

2. Item, etsi misericordia et iustitia in Deo secundum *principale significatum* sint idem[^p963-5], tamen *ratio dicendi* est altera et altera; hoc ergo erit a parte *connotati*: ergo alium effectum connotat misericordia quam iustitia. Quodsi eundem, tunc nec est differentia a parte connotati nec in se.

<!-- page 964 -->

3. Item, *ratione* videtur: quia misericordia facit *contra* merita, ut bonum ei qui male meruit, sed iustitia *secundum* merita; sed idem opus non potest fieri *contra* merita et *secundum* merita: ergo etc.

**Contra:**

1. Super illud Psalmi[^p964-1]: *Universae viae Domini misericordia et veritas*; dicit Cassiodorus: « Haec duo in omni opere Domini simul sunt, etsi non nobis simul appareant ».

2. Item, Augustinus, *de Concordia Evangelistarum*[^p964-2]: « Deus, qui res humanas curat, iuste et misericorditer curat, ut nec praecludat misericordia iustitiam, nec iustitia misericordiam excludat ».

3. Item, *ratione* videtur: quia Deus remunerat aliquem supra condignum; constat, quod istud unum est opus, nec est misericordiae tantum, quia meruit praemiari, nec iustitiae tantum, quia non tantum meruit praemiari: ergo simul misericordiae et iustitiae.

### Conclusio

> *In eodem opere Dei simul sunt misericordia et veritas secundum tres modos, sed non secundum easdem rationes.*

**Respondeo:** Dicendum, quod *misericordia* dicitur tripliciter, similiter et *iustitia*. Uno modo misericordia largissime dicitur *divinae bonitatis affluentia*; communiter vero dicitur *benignitas in supererogatione bonorum*; stricte vero dicitur *pietas in sublevatione malorum*. — Similiter et *iustitia* dicitur communissime *divinae bonitatis condecentia*; communiter vero dicitur *liberalitas in retributione praemiorum*; stricte *severitas in punitione malorum*[^p964-3].

Secundum igitur hos tres modos simul currunt in eodem opere. Nam *primo* modo *misericordia*, divinae bonitatis affluentia, et *iustitia*, divinae bonitatis condecentia, sunt in eodem opere, ita quod in omni opere, quia omnia facit ex affluenti bonitate et nihil facit ex affluenti bonitate, nisi quod decet bonitatem suam. — Similiter *secundo* modo *misericordia*, quae est benignitas in supererogatione bonorum, et *iustitia*, quae est liberalitas in retributione praemiorum, simul concurrunt, quia, cum[^p964-4] retribuit bona, non retribuit nisi merenti et supra id quod meruit. — Similiter *tertio* modo *misericordia*, quae est pietas in sublevatione malorum, et *iustitia*, quae est severitas in retributione malorum, simul currunt, quia nunquam ita severe punit, quin aliquod debitum de poena dimittat. — Sic igitur patet, quod misericordia et veritas *communissime* sunt in eodem opere, quia in *omni* opere Dei; sed *communiter* sunt in omni opere *retributionis bonorum*; *proprie* sunt in *retributione poenarum* et suppliciorum. — Sunt tamen in eodem opere secundum aliam et aliam conditionem: in quantum enim retribuit quod meruit, *iustitia*; in quantum supra, vel infra, *misericordia*.

**Ad argumenta:**

*Ad 1 et 2.* Ex his patent omnia obiecta, quia in eodem opere necessario concurrit *esse* misericordiam et iustitiam; et differunt[^p964-5] in *connotatis*, ideo non ratione *operum* diversorum, sed ratione diversarum *conditionum* in eodem opere.

*Ad 3.* Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod misericordia facit contra merita; dico, quod non dicitur eo ipso *misericordia*, quia facit *contra* merita, sed quia facit *supra*; et hoc simul cum iustitia stat[^p964-6].

---

english:
### Question II. *Whether in the same work of the Lord there are mercy and truth.*

Secondly it is asked whether in the *same* work of the Lord there are mercy and truth. And it seems that there are not:

1. Because in us one is the effect of mercy, namely *to spare*; another the effect of justice, namely *to punish*: therefore if this is transferred from us to God, it seems that it is similarly so in God, since this is not repugnant to the divine simplicity.

2. Likewise, even if in God mercy and justice are, according to their *principal signification*, the same[^p963-5], nevertheless the *account of predication* is one and another; this therefore will be on the side of the *connoted*: therefore mercy connotes a different effect than justice does. But if it connotes the same, then there is no difference either on the side of the connoted or in itself.

3. Likewise, it seems *from reason*: because mercy acts *against* merits, as when good comes to one who has deserved ill, whereas justice acts *according to* merits; but the same work cannot be done *against* merits and *according to* merits: therefore etc.

**On the contrary:**

1. On that verse of the Psalm[^p964-1]: *All the ways of the Lord are mercy and truth*; Cassiodorus says: « These two are together in every work of the Lord, even though they do not appear to us together ».

2. Likewise, Augustine, *On the Concord of the Evangelists*[^p964-2]: « God, who cares for human affairs, cares for them justly and mercifully, so that mercy does not shut out justice, nor justice exclude mercy ».

3. Likewise, it seems *from reason*: because God rewards someone beyond what is condign; it is established that this is one work, and it is not of mercy alone, since he deserved to be rewarded, nor of justice alone, since he did not deserve to be rewarded so much: therefore it is at once of mercy and of justice.

### Conclusion

> *In the same work of God there are together mercy and truth according to three modes, but not according to the same accounts.*

**I respond:** It must be said that *mercy* is spoken of in three ways, and likewise *justice*. In one way mercy is spoken of most broadly as *the affluence of the divine goodness*; but commonly it is called *kindness in the superabundant bestowal of goods*; while strictly it is called *pity in the relieving of evils*. — Likewise *justice* is spoken of most commonly as *the befittingness of the divine goodness*; but commonly it is called *liberality in the rendering of rewards*; strictly, *severity in the punishment of evils*[^p964-3].

According, therefore, to these three modes they run together in the same work. For in the *first* mode *mercy*, the affluence of the divine goodness, and *justice*, the befittingness of the divine goodness, are in the same work, and this in such a way that they are in every work, because he does all things out of an affluent goodness and does nothing out of an affluent goodness except what befits his own goodness. — Likewise in the *second* mode *mercy*, which is kindness in the superabundant bestowal of goods, and *justice*, which is liberality in the rendering of rewards, concur together, because, when[^p964-4] he renders good things, he renders them only to one who merits and beyond what he has merited. — Likewise in the *third* mode *mercy*, which is pity in the relieving of evils, and *justice*, which is severity in the rendering of evils, run together, because he never punishes so severely but that he remits some debt of the penalty. — Thus therefore it is plain that mercy and truth are *most commonly* in the same work, because they are in *every* work of God; but *commonly* they are in every work of *the rendering of goods*; *properly* they are in *the rendering of penalties* and punishments. — Yet they are in the same work according to one and another condition: for insofar as he renders what one has merited, it is *justice*; insofar as he renders above, or below, it is *mercy*.

**To the arguments:**

*To 1 and 2.* From these things all the objections are plain, because in the same work there necessarily concur the *being* of mercy and of justice; and they differ[^p964-5] in what is *connoted*, and therefore not by reason of diverse *works*, but by reason of diverse *conditions* in the same work.

*To 3.* To that which is objected, that mercy acts against merits; I say that it is not called *mercy* on that very account, because it acts *against* merits, but because it acts *above* them; and this stands together with justice[^p964-6].

---

la: Cod. K (1 a secunda manu) *Deus* pro *idem*. Cfr. hic lit. Magistri, c. 3.

en: Codex K (1, by a second hand) reads *Deus* for *idem*. Compare the text of the Master here, c. 3.

la: Psalm. 24, 10. — Glossa exhibetur a Petro Lombardo in hunc locum, ubi pro *simul appareant* substituitur *manifeste appareant*. Expositio huius loci sumta est ex Cassiodoro et Augustino, ita quod prima pars sit *Cassiodori*, secunda *Augustini* (in hunc loc.); in secunda parte, quae verba a S. Bonav. allegantur, videntur apposita, quia apud August. (in hunc loc.) non occurrunt. Cfr. Cassiodor., in Ps. 100, 1.

en: Psalm 24, 10. — The gloss is given by Peter Lombard on this passage, where for *simul appareant* is substituted *manifeste appareant*. The exposition of this passage is taken from Cassiodorus and Augustine, in such a way that the first part is Cassiodorus', the second Augustine's (on this passage); in the second part, the words that are cited by St. Bonaventure appear to have been added, since they do not occur in Augustine (on this passage). Compare Cassiodorus, on Ps. 100, 1.

la: Libr. 1. c. 14. n. 21: *Deus unus, qui fecit caelum et terram et res humanas iuste ac misericorditer curat, ita ut nec praecludat iustitia misericordiam, nec impediat misericordia iustitiam* etc.

en: Book 1, c. 14, n. 21: *The one God, who made heaven and earth and cares for human affairs justly and mercifully, in such a way that justice does not shut out mercy, nor mercy impede justice*, etc.

la: Anselm., Proslog. c. 10: *Cum enim punis malos, iustum est, quia illorum meritis convenit; cum vero parcis malis, iustum est, non quia illorum meritis, sed quia bonitati tuae decens est. Nam parcendo malis ita iustus es secundum te et non secundum nos, sicut misericors es secundum nos et non secundum te* etc.

en: Anselm, *Proslogion* c. 10: *For when you punish the wicked, it is just, because it accords with their merits; but when you spare the wicked, it is just, not because it accords with their merits, but because it is befitting to your goodness. For in sparing the wicked you are just according to yourself and not according to us, just as you are merciful according to us and not according to yourself*, etc.

la: Non pauci codd. *quia cui*. Inferius pro *supra id quod* cod. E *supra quam*.

en: Not a few codices read *quia cui*. Below, for *supra id quod*, codex E reads *supra quam*.

la: Vat. legit: *quia, cum in eodem opere concurrant necessario misericordia et iustitia, differunt tamen*. Eadem Vat. mox post *ideo non* addit *in*.

en: The Vatican edition reads: *because, since mercy and justice necessarily concur in the same work, they nevertheless differ*. The same Vatican edition shortly afterwards adds *in* after *ideo non*.

la: Vide scholion ad praecedentem quaest.

en: See the scholion on the preceding question. ---

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** Latin re-set from `raw/bonaventure_vol4_raw.txt` L102400–102498, verified line-by-line against the 450 dpi column bands `/tmp/colcrop/vol4-p963-{L,R}-{1,2}.png` and `vol4-p964-{L,R}-{0,1,2}.png`. Bands were used as generated at the true per-page gutter (p.963 @ 1577, p.964 @ 2178); **no bands were regenerated**. The OCR cascade-shatters the Respondeo and every footer here, so the band read is authoritative throughout the Respondeo, the Conclusio, and the whole apparatus.

**No scholion.** Article II's scholion sits at raw L102368 in `a2-q1` and covers q1–q4. It is deliberately not duplicated here. Footer note 6 of p.964 (*Vide scholion ad praecedentem quaest.*) is an apparatus cross-reference pointing at it, not a scholion header, and is rendered as apparatus.

**Page→apparatus split map.**
- **p.963** footers 1–5. Notes **1** (August., *Enarrat. in Ps.* 24, 10), **2** (*Sive in libro, cui titulus…* / Boethius, *de Hebdomadibus*), **3** (Psalm. 24, 10), **4** (Hieron., *Comment. in Eccl.* 7, 17) are anchored in **a2-q1**'s body (the tail of q1 and the Article II scholion) and belong to that chunk. Note **5** (Cod. K … *Deus* pro *idem*) anchors at *sint idem* in objection 2 of this quaestio → **claimed here**.
- **p.964** footers 1–7. Notes **1–6** all anchor in this quaestio's body (Contra 1, Contra 2, the Respondeo's *stricte severitas*, *cum* retribuit, *differunt*, and *iustitia stat*) → **claimed here**. Note **7** (Psalm. 100, 1 + Glossa ordinaria) anchors at *Super illud Psalmi* in Quaestio III → **forwarded to a2-q3**.

**Hand-offs.**
- *Backward (a2-q1, shares p.963):* p.963 notes 1–4 forwarded to a2-q1; this chunk claims only note 5. Derived independently from the bands without reading a2-q1's file. **Cross-check: agrees exactly with a2-q1's independent derivation** — both sides count five footers on p.963, both assign 1–4 to q1 and 5 to q2. No disagreement.
- *Forward (a2-q3, shares p.964):* p.964 note 7 forwarded to a2-q3.

**Seam checks.** Opening (*Secundo quaeritur…*) is continuous with the QUAESTIO II header at raw L102400–102402 and with the ordinal sequence (q1 = *Primo*, q2 = *Secundo*, q3 = *Tertio*). Closing sentence (*…et hoc simul cum iustitia stat.*) parses cleanly and is immediately followed on the page by the QUAESTIO III header — no cascade-merge signature.

**Page break.** The printed p.963/964 break falls mid-word (*mise-|ricordia*) inside objection 2. The `<!-- page 964 -->` comment is placed at the next clean paragraph boundary (objection 3); the objection-2 paragraph is rendered whole.

**Marginalia trimmed.** The printed side-glosses (*Fundamenta.*, *Conclusio generalis*, *Misericordia sumitur tripliciter.*, *Item iustitia.*, *Concl. …*, *Ad 1.*, *Ad 2. ad …*) are editorial marginal apparatus, not Bonaventure's text, and are omitted per the OCR cleanup rules.

**OCR-vs-band disagreements resolved at band time** (band authoritative, no `[?]` parked): OCR `aUus` → `alius`; `Ilem` → `Item`; `iliud`/`Psalrai` → `illud`/`Psalmi`; `Uera` → `Item`; `aCQuentia`/`afiluenti` → `affluentia`/`affluenti`; `iiberahtas` → `liberalitas`; `raerenti`/`raeruil`/`raalorum` → `merenti`/`meruit`/`malorum`; `Siraihter` → `Similiter`; `om^ii` → `omni`; `suppliciorura` → `suppliciorum`; `hi eodem` → `In eodem` (Conclusio); the garbled `c NcLus 1 0.` at L102471 is the `CONCLUSIO.` header; `Item. r at ione \\deinr` → `Item, ratione videtur`; `dicilur`/`slal` → `dicitur`/`stat`. Apparatus: `Doniino` → `Domino`, `inhimiana`/`iustiiia`/`fragiliiati` → `inhumana`/`iustitia`/`fragilitati`, `iustics inullum` → `iustus multum`, `Arislot.` → `Aristot.` (p.963 notes, not claimed here); p.964 note 3's tail (`decens est. Nam parcendo…`) continues across the column gutter and was reunited from the p.964 L-2 and R-2 footer bands.

**`[?]` flags.** None. One low-confidence-but-legible reading recorded rather than flagged: p.963 note 5's siglum reads `Cod. K (1 a secunda manu)` in the band; the OCR gives `Cod. K (I a secunda manu)`. The band glyph is a digit-like `1`, which in Quaracchi's siglum set is the codex `l`; rendered as printed.


title: Dist. 46, Art. 2, Q. 3

source_text:
<!-- page 964 -->

### Articulus II. Quaestio III. *Utrum in omni opere Domini sit misericordia et veritas, secundum quod proprie accipiuntur, an aliquando separentur.*

> Quaracchi restarts its footnote numbering on every printed page. The notes below are therefore labelled by page: note 7 of page 964, and notes 1 through 12 of page 965. Note that the printed footer numbers run in column order while the body anchors run in reading order, so the sequence in the body is not always ascending.

Tertio, dato quod in *omni* opere Domini sit misericordia et veritas, secundum quod dicuntur *largissime*, quaeritur, utrum secundum quod *proprie* accipiuntur, an aliquando separentur. Et quod non, videtur.

1. Super illud Psalmi[^p964-7]: *Misericordiam et iudicium*; Glossa: « In primo adventu misericordia, in secundo iustitia »; sed primus adventus est ad iustificandum: ergo non concurrit ibi nisi *misericordia*.

<!-- page 965 -->

2. Item, nos petimus, quod Deus non retribuat nobis peccatoribus secundum merita — ita orat Ecclesia[^p965-1] — sed iustitia retribuit secundum merita: ergo in iustificatione impii non est *iustitia*, alioquin, si ibi iustitiam petimus, ergo non iustificari.

3. Item, iustificatio est viri peccatoris, qui non est dignus pane[^p965-2]: ergo si nihil apud Deum meruit, et iustitia, de qua loquimur, merita respicit; ergo non est ibi iustitia.

4. Item, iustificatio fit per gratiam; sed si gratia ex meritis, *iam non est gratia*[^p965-3]: ergo aut non est ibi iustitia, aut non est ibi gratia. Sed est gratia: non ergo iustitia.

**Contra:**

1. *Universae viae Domini misericordia et veritas*[^p965-4]: ergo si iustificatio est via Domini, ergo est ibi misericordia et iustitia.

2. Item, in Psalmo[^p965-5]: *Iustus Dominus in omnibus viis suis et sanctus in omnibus* etc.; et alibi: *Miserationes eius super omnia opera eius*: ergo in omni opere concurrunt misericordia et iustitia.

3. Item, Augustinus[^p965-6]: « Qui creavit te sine te non iustificabit te sine te »: ergo non omnino est iustificatio a Deo, sed aliquid concernit a parte nostra; sed misericordia non concernit nisi miseriam: ergo quod amplius ibi concernit, hoc est iustitiae.

4. Item, *ratione* videtur: quia misericordia consistit in remissione culpae et poenae; sed nulli omnino remittit culpam et poenam; quod patet, quia sine poenalitatibus non possumus vivere[^p965-7]: ergo etc.

### Conclusio

> **Conclusio.** *In opere iustificationis est misericordia et iustitia, non tamen secundum idem.*

**Respondeo:** Dicendum, quod in opere iustificationis est misericordia et veritas, non tamen secundum idem. — Et hoc patet sic: quia impius ex peccato offendit Deum et dignus est poena aeterna, et ita est ibi *offensa* et *reatus ad poenam*; et *misericordia* est in remittendo *offensam* et *reatum ad poenam aeternam*, sed *iustitia* est in obligando ad *temporalem poenam tantum*[^p965-8]; etsi baptismus liberet a poena *aeterna et satisfactoria*, non tamen ab *omni* poena, immo poenalitates remanent in corpore et anima.

**Ad argumenta:**

*Ad 1.* Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod in primo adventu est misericordia; dicendum, quod hoc non est dictum *praecise*, sed *appropriate*[^p965-9]: quia, etsi utrobique sit misericordia et iustitia, hic tamen magis relucet misericordia, ibi magis iustitia.

*Ad 2.* Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod petimus, quod non retribuat secundum merita; dicendum, quod[^p965-10] non petimus, quod *nullo* modo secundum merita retribuat, quia debemus velle puniri; sed quod non *omnino* secundum merita tribuat.

*Ad 3. 4.* Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod Deus gratis iustificat; dicendum, quod quantum ad *gratiae collationem* est tantum misericordia, non iustitia, nisi dicatur iustitia *condecentia bonitatis*[^p965-11]; quantum vero ad *poenae exactionem*, dico, quod est *proprie* iustitia.

**Ad fundamentum in oppositum:** Ad illud quod obiicitur ad oppositum, dicendum, quod aut intelligitur de iustitia, ut est condecentia bonitatis, aut si proprie, intelligitur de iustitia ratione punitionis coniunctae iustificationi[^p965-12].

---

english:
### Article II. Question III. *Whether in every work of the Lord there are mercy and truth, according as they are properly taken, or whether they are sometimes separated.*

Third, granted that in *every* work of the Lord there are mercy and truth according as they are said *most broadly*, it is asked whether, according as they are taken *properly*, they are sometimes separated. And it seems that they are not.

1. On that passage of the Psalm[^p964-7]: *Mercy and judgment*; the Gloss: "In the first coming, mercy; in the second, justice"; but the first coming is for justifying: therefore nothing concurs there except *mercy*.

2. Likewise, we ask that God not repay us sinners according to our merits — so the Church prays[^p965-1] — but justice repays according to merits: therefore in the justification of the impious there is no *justice*; otherwise, if we there ask for justice, then we ask not to be justified.

3. Likewise, justification belongs to a sinful man, who is not worthy of bread[^p965-2]: therefore, if he has merited nothing before God, and the justice of which we speak has regard to merits, then there is no justice there.

4. Likewise, justification comes about through grace; but if grace is from merits, *then it is no longer grace*[^p965-3]: therefore either there is no justice there, or there is no grace there. But there is grace: therefore not justice.

**On the contrary:**

1. *All the ways of the Lord are mercy and truth*[^p965-4]: therefore if justification is a way of the Lord, then there are mercy and justice there.

2. Likewise, in the Psalm[^p965-5]: *The Lord is just in all his ways and holy in all* etc.; and elsewhere: *His mercies are over all his works*: therefore in every work mercy and justice concur.

3. Likewise, Augustine[^p965-6]: "He who created you without you will not justify you without you": therefore justification is not wholly from God, but something is contributed on our part; but mercy has to do with nothing but misery: therefore what further has to do with it there belongs to justice.

4. Likewise, it seems so *by reason*: because mercy consists in the remission of fault and punishment; but he remits fault and punishment to no one entirely; which is plain, because we cannot live without penalties[^p965-7]: therefore etc.

### Conclusion

> **Conclusion.** *In the work of justification there are mercy and justice, yet not according to the same respect.*

**I respond:** It must be said that in the work of justification there are mercy and truth, yet not according to the same respect. — And this is plain thus: because the impious man by sin offends God and is worthy of eternal punishment, and so there are there an *offense* and a *liability to punishment*; and *mercy* lies in remitting the *offense* and the *liability to eternal punishment*, whereas *justice* lies in binding him to *temporal punishment only*[^p965-8]; and although baptism frees from the *eternal and satisfactory* punishment, it does not free from *every* punishment — rather, penalties remain in body and soul.

**To the arguments:**

*To 1.* To that which is objected, that in the first coming there is mercy: it must be said that this is not said *precisely*, but *by appropriation*[^p965-9]: because, although in both there are mercy and justice, yet here mercy shines out more, there justice more.

*To 2.* To that which is objected, that we ask that he not repay according to merits: it must be said that[^p965-10] we do not ask that he repay in *no* way according to merits, since we ought to will to be punished; but that he not repay *wholly* according to merits.

*To 3 and 4.* To that which is objected, that God justifies gratuitously: it must be said that, as regards *the conferring of grace*, there is only mercy, not justice — unless justice be called *the befittingness of goodness*[^p965-11]; but as regards *the exacting of punishment*, I say that it is *properly* justice.

**To the argument on the opposite side:** To that which is objected on the opposite side, it must be said that either it is understood of justice as it is the befittingness of goodness, or, if properly, it is understood of the justice belonging to the punishment joined to justification[^p965-12].

---

la: Psalm. 100, 1. — Glossa *ordinaria* apud Strabum ex August. (in hunc loc.): « Misericordia nunc, iudicium in futuro ». Cfr. Glossa *ordinaria* in Ps. 24, 10. sumta ex Augustino: Ergo *universae viae Domini* sunt duo adventus Filii Dei: unus miserantis, alter iudicantis… In primo misericordiam [manifeste nobis exhibet], in secundo veritatem. — Post *ibi* ex cod. F supplevimus *nisi*; cod. B omittit *non* ante *concurrit*.

en: Psalm 100:1. — The *ordinary* Gloss in Strabo, from Augustine (on this passage): "Mercy now, judgment in the future." Cf. the *ordinary* Gloss on Ps. 24:10, taken from Augustine: "Therefore *all the ways of the Lord* are the two comings of the Son of God: one of him who shows mercy, the other of him who judges… In the first he [manifestly shows us] mercy, in the second truth." — After *ibi* we have supplied *nisi* from codex F; codex B omits *non* before *concurrit*.

la: Cfr. Collecta pro feria V. post Cineres: *Deus, qui culpa offenderis… et flagella tuae iracundiae, quae pro peccatis nostris meremur, averte.* Cfr. ultimam orationem in Missa pro feria II. post Dominic. I. Quadrages. et vide in Litaniis omnium Sanctor.: *Domine, non secundum peccata nostra facias nobis* etc. (ex Ps. 102, 10.). — Voci *ita* cod. aa praemittit *et*. Subinde pro *iustitiam petimus* Vat. *est iustitia, petimus*.

en: Cf. the Collect for Thursday after Ash Wednesday: *O God, who art offended by fault… turn away the scourges of thy wrath, which we deserve for our sins.* Cf. the last prayer in the Mass for Monday after the First Sunday of Lent, and see in the Litany of All Saints: *O Lord, deal not with us according to our sins* etc. (from Ps. 102:10). — Codex aa prefixes *et* to the word *ita*. Thereafter, for *iustitiam petimus* the Vatican edition reads *est iustitia, petimus*.

la: Cfr. supra pag. 356, nota 9.

en: Cf. above, p. 356, note 9.

la: Rom. 11, 6: *Si autem gratia, iam non ex operibus; alioquin gratia iam non est gratia.*

en: Rom. 11:6: *But if by grace, then not now by works; otherwise grace is no more grace.*

la: Psalm. 144, 17. Ibid. v. 9. habetur seq. locus.

en: Psalm 144:17. The following passage is found ibid., v. 9.

la: Vide supra pag. 327, nota 2. — Codd. E F L cum textu originali *iustificat*.

en: See above, p. 327, note 2. — Codices E F L, with the original text, read *iustificat*.

la: Cfr. supra d. 4. p. 1. a. 1. q. 2. in corp., ad quem locum etiam infra in fine corp. quaest. respicitur.

en: Cf. above, d. 4, p. 1, a. 1, q. 2, in the body, to which passage reference is also made below at the end of the body of the question.

la: Ut dictum est supra d. 15. p. 1. q. 1. in corp. Cfr. etiam d. 17. p. 1. a. 1. et 2. — Superius post *reatus ad poenam* cod. L supplet *aeternam*.

en: As was said above, d. 15, p. 1, q. 1, in the body. Cf. also d. 17, p. 1, a. 1 and 2. — Above, after *reatus ad poenam*, codex L supplies *aeternam*.

la: Ed. 1 *sed secundum quid*.

en: Edition 1 reads *sed secundum quid*.

la: Edd. hic addunt: *hoc intelligitur secundum iustitiae rigorem. Vel dicendum quod*, et in fine solut. omittunt *sed quod… tribuat*.

en: The editions here add: *this is understood according to the rigor of justice. Or it must be said that*; and at the end of the solution they omit *sed quod… tribuat*.

la: Cfr. supra pag. 964, nota 3.

en: Cf. above, p. 964, note 3.

en: See the scholion on question 1 of this article. ---

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** Latin re-set from `raw/bonaventure_vol4_raw.txt` L102499–L102593, verified throughout against the 450 dpi column bands `/tmp/colcrop/vol4-p964-{L,R}-2.png` and `vol4-p965-{L,R}-{0,1,2}.png`. Bands were used as they stood (regenerated by the coordinator at the true per-page gutter: p.964 @ 2178, p.965 @ 1480); **no bands were regenerated by this agent.** The OCR cascade-shattered the *Conclusio*, *Respondeo* and every footer, so the band read is authoritative there.

**No scholion.** Article II's scholion sits in `a2-q1` (raw L102368) and covers q1–q4. Raw L102527 (`Vide scholion ad praecedentem quaest.`) is footer note 6 of p.964 — an apparatus cross-reference, **not** a scholion header — and it belongs to `a2-q2` by body anchor, not to this chunk. Likewise this chunk's own p.965 note 12 (`Vide scholion ad 1. huius articuli quaest.`) is a cross-reference to a2-q1's scholion.

**Page → apparatus split map.**
- **p.964** carries 7 footer notes (left column 1–3 + continuation; right column 4–7). Derived independently from the bands: notes **1–6 belong to `a2-q2`** (note 1 = Ps. 24,10 Glossa/Lombardo; 2 = *Libr. l. c. 14. n. 21*, Augustine; 3 = Anselm, *Proslog.* c. 10; 4 = *Non pauci codd. quia cui*; 5 = *Vat. legit: quia, cum in eodem opere…*; 6 = *Vide scholion ad praecedentem quaest.*), and note **7 belongs to this chunk** — it is anchored at `Super illud Psalmi⁷` (Ps. 100,1, *Misericordiam et iudicium*), the first argument of q3. Note 7's text runs over onto the top of p.965's left footer block (`nobis exhibet], in secundo veritatem. — Post ibi ex cod. F supplevimus nisi…`) and is rendered here in full.
- **p.965** carries 13 footer notes. Notes **1–12 belong to this chunk** (body anchors run 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 in the left column, then 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 in the right column). Note **13** (Hugh of St. Victor, *de Sacram.* p. VIII c. 8–9) is anchored in `a2-q4`'s first argument and is **forwarded to `a2-q4`**.
- Total rendered here: **13 entries** (1 from p.964, 12 from p.965).

**Hand-offs.**
- *Picked up (backward, p.964):* none required — this chunk claims only p.964 note 7. `a2-q2` should claim p.964 notes 1–6. This split was derived independently from the bands, not from `a2-q2`'s file.
- *Forwarded (forward, p.965):* p.965 note 13 → `a2-q4`. `a2-q4` begins at raw L102594 (header OCR-garbled as `QUAESTiO IV.`); its opener `Quarto quaeritur, utrum possit Deus aliquem pure remunerare ex iustitia, vel pure ex misericordia, ita quod ista duo separentur. Et quod sic, videtur:` starts in the lower left column of p.965.

**Seam checks.** Opening is continuous: the QUAESTIO III header (raw L102499) is immediately followed by the ordinal opener *Tertio, dato quod…*, which matches quaestio 3 — alignment confirmed. The closing sentence (*…intelligitur de iustitia ratione punitionis coniunctae iustificationi*) parses cleanly and is the last text before the full-width QUAESTIO IV header — no cascade-merge signature. The p.964→p.965 page break falls **mid-argument-1** (after *Misericordiam et iu-*); the `<!-- page 965 -->` marker is placed at the next paragraph boundary (before argument 2) since the marker cannot sit inside a paragraph.

**Title.** The OCR splits the title across two lines (L102501–L102502). Both clauses (*…secundum quod proprie accipiuntur* / *an aliquando separentur*) are captured in `title_la`, `title_en` and the rendered headings; verified against the p.964 L-2 / R-2 bands, where the second half (*aliquando separentur.*) sits at the top of the right band.

**Band-vs-OCR disagreements resolved at band time** (no `[?]` flags carried):
- OCR `dignuspane^` → bands read `dignus pane` (p.965 L-0).
- OCR `Gontra` → bands read `Contra` (small caps).
- OCR `o. Itera, Augustinus` → bands read `3. Item, Augustinus` (the `3` was digit-mangled to `o`).
- OCR `po&nam` → bands read `poenam`; `iempora-lem` → `temporalem`; `noniustitia` → `non iustitia`; `boniiatis` → `bonitatis`; `vellepnniri` → `velle puniri`; `inteUigitur`/`inlelligitur` → `intelligitur`.
- OCR running head at L102543 reads `DIST. XLVI. ART. II. QUAEST. IV,`; the band confirms `DIST. XLVI. ART. II. QUAEST. IV.` — page furniture for p.965 (whose last question is IV), not a semantic header for this chunk.
- Printed page number on the p.965 R-0 band renders as `965` (OCR-ambiguous `96S`); confirmed 965, consistent with pdf = printed + 20.

**`[?]` flags:** none.

**Marginalia trimmed** (editorial side-notes, not Bonaventure's text): *Conclusio.*, *Explicatur.*, *Solutio oppositorum.*, *Notandum.* (×2), *Ad fundam.*, and the partial *Ad …* marginal at the foot of p.964's right column.