I. To the Question

4. Response.

The power to sin means either a direct ordering to an act of sin or the foundation of this ordering, by reason of which he who has it is said to be able to sin.

5. If in the former way the ordering is either to the act substrate [sc. to sin] or to the deformity in the act. If in the first of these, the order is from God,a as are both the extremes of the order; and God too, and not just the created will, has power over the substrate act, because he himself causes it [dd.34-37 nn.22-26], according to one opinion [sc. Scotus’ own, dd.34-37 nn.119-123, 97]. If in the second of these, this ordering to sin is nothing, just as the term of it too is nothing; and so it is not from God.b

a. a[Interpolation] The power to sin can be taken either for the power that is the principle of the act, or for the power as it states an order to the act of sin, just as in other cases the power to see can be taken for the principle of vision or for the order to the act of seeing. If it is taken in the second way, then the order is to the act substrate to the deformity, and thus such order is from God.

b. b[Interpolation] Or this order is to the deformity that is in the act of sin; and because such order is nothing, just as its term - namely ‘to sin’ - is also nothing, so it is not from God.

6. But if we speak of the foundation of the order, I say that something positive is the foundation of this order, taking order in both ways of taking it.a For just as in the case of passive powers the proximate subject of the habit and of the privation is the same, so too a free active power that is defectible is - in acting and in failing - immediate to opposites: to rectitude certainly when acting and to sin when failing; and this absolute subject is, in respect of both, the proper power, in the way that a power can exist in respect of both, namely by being effective or defective.

In this way is the power to sin from God, that is, the nature whereby the one who has the nature is able to sin; being able to sin indeed not by effecting but by defecting, of which defecting the absolute subject is the proximate reason.

a. a[Interpolation] But if the power to sin is taken for the power as principle, which is the foundation of this order and respect, I say that there are distinct ideas in it as it is such, ideas corresponding to two things in the act, namely the substance of the act and the deformity; for by reason of the freedom that is in it, the power as principle founds an order to an act really positive, but there is a limitation attached to freedom of choice in a creature, by reason of which it founds an order to deformity in the act; for this limitation takes from freedom the perfection that freedom has in God, where it is a perfection simply, simply in the sense that it cannot fail. I say therefore that this totality, namely ‘limited free power’, is the foundation of this order in both ways of taking the order, namely to the act in itself and to the deformity - and such foundation is called the power to sin.

7. And if the objection is made that the will is always deficient as it is from nothing, not from anything positive in it, I reply that being defectible, that is, being able to return to nothing, is consequent to every creature, because every creature is from nothing; but to be defectible like this, namely by sinning, is proper to this nature and is consequent to it by the reason whereby it is this specific nature, which nature is able to be a principle of opposites (namely by acting and by defecting).Cf. Bonaventure Sentences 2 d.44 a.1 q.1, “When I say ‘power to sin’, I am asserting two things: I am asserting both some power and a power orderable to such an act. If then we are speaking of the power to sin as it is a power, since this power is free choice, then without doubt it is from God. But if we are speaking of the power’s ability to be ordered to sin...then it is possible to speak in two ways of this ability: either in respect of the deformity or in respect of the substrate action. If in respect of the substrate action, then such ability is from God, as the action substrate to sin is also from God. But if we are speaking of it in respect of deformity, then, since the deformity is nothing other than a privation and a defect, such ability is nothing other than an ability to defect; and so, just as the defect of deformity is not from God, so neither is from God the ability to defect, but it exists in the rational creature itself, because the rational creature is from nothing.” ⁵⁹