Frontmatter

Titlepage

The Ordinatio of Blessed John Duns Scotus

Book 2. Distinctions 4 - 44

Translated by Peter L.P. Simpson

Translator's Preface

This translation of Book 2 Distinctions 4 to 44 of the Ordinatio (aka Opus Oxoniense) of Blessed John Duns Scotus is complete. These distinctions fill volume eight of the Vatican critical edition of the Latin text edited by the Scotus Commission in Rome and published by Quarrachi.

Scotus’ Latin is tight and not seldom elliptical, exploiting to the full the grammatical resources of the language to make his meaning clear (especially the backward references of his pronouns). In English this ellipsis must, for the sake of intelligibility, often be translated with a fuller repetition of words and phrases than Scotus himself gives. The possibility of mistake thus arises if the wrong word or phrase is chosen for repetition. The only check to remove error is to ensure that the resulting English makes the sense intended by Scotus. Whether this sense has always been captured in the translation that follows must be judged by the reader. In addition there are passages where not only the argumentation but the grammar too is obscure, and I cannot vouch for the success of my attempts to penetrate the obscurity. So, for these and the like reasons, comments and notice of errors from readers are most welcome.

Peter L.P. Simpson June 2016

Contents

Book Two

Fourth and Fifth Distinctions

             

Question 1: Whether between the Creation and Blessedness of the Good Angel there was any Interval	Num. 1
Question 2: Whether the Angel merited Blessedness before receiving it	Num. 7
I. To the Second Question
A. The Opinion held by Peter Lombard	Num. 11
B. The Common and Scotus’ Opinion	Num. 15
C. To the Principal Arguments	Num. 21
II. To the First Question	Num. 23
A. How Many Intervals must be Posited for the Angels
1. The Possibility of Several Intervals	Num. 24
2. What should be Thought	Num. 30
B. What these Intervals Were	Num. 41
C. To the Principal Arguments	Num. 47
D. To the Reason for the Opinion Positing only Two Intervals	Num. 50

Sixth Distinction

                 

Question 1: Whether the Bad Angel could have Desired Equality with God	Num. 1
I. To the Question
A. The Opinion of Others	Num. 4
B. Scotus’ own Opinion	Num. 9
C. To the Arguments for the Opinion of Others	Num. 14
II. To the Principal Argument	Num. 23
Question 2: Whether the First Sin of the Angel was Formally Pride	Num. 24
I. To the Question	Num. 33
A. What the Malice was in the First Angel Sinning
1. On Ordered and Disordered Acts of the Will	Num. 34
2. On the First Disorder in the ‘Willing of Friendship’	Num. 37
3. On the First Disorder in the ‘Willing of Concupiscence’	Num. 39
a) On the Concupiscence of Blessedness	Num. 40
b) On the Concupiscence of Excellence	Num. 63
B. To what Class of Sin the Malice in the First Angel Sinning belonged	Num. 64
II. To the Principal Arguments	Num. 74
III. To the Arguments for the Opposite	Num. 79

Seventh Distinction

                

Single Question: Whether the Bad Angel necessarily Wills badly	Num. 1
I. To the Question
A. The Opinion of Others	Num. 9
B. Rejection of the Opinions together	Num. 12
C. Rejection of the First Opinion in Particular	Num. 19
D. Rejection of the Second Opinion in Particular	Num. 23
II. Scotus’ own Response	Num. 27
A. On the Degrees of Goodness and Malice	Num. 28
B. On Goodness and Malice in the Bad Angel	Num. 40
1. On Goodness in Genus	Num. 41
2. On Meritorious Goodness	Num. 42
a) On Real Potency which is a Principle Num. 43
b) On Real Potency which is a Principle of Being	Num. 49
c) On Logical Potency	Num. 50
3. On Goodness of Virtue or of Circumstances Num. 62
III. To the Principal Arguments	Num. 76

Eighth Distinction

      

Single Question: Whether an Angel can assume a Body by which he may exercise the Works of Life	Num. 1
I. To the Question	Num. 6
A. What it is for an Angel to assume a Body	Num. 7
B. What sort of Body an Angel assumes	Num. 8
C. What Works of Life an Angel can Exercise in an Assumed Body	Num. 10
II. To the Principal Arguments	Num. 16

Ninth Distinction

                     

Question 1: Whether a Superior Angel can illumine an Inferior Angel	Num. 1
Question 2: Whether one Angel can intellectually speak to a Second	Num. 6
I. To the Second Question
A. The Opinion of Henry of Ghent	Num. 17
1. How the Angel who speaks knows Singulars Num. 19
2. How Knowledge of a Singular escapes another Angel	Num. 26
3. How Knowledge of a Singular is made
Clear to Another Angel	Num. 29
4. How One Angel illumines Another	Num. 30
B. Rejection of the Opinion	Num. 33
C. Scotus’ own Response
1. On an Angel’s Mode of Speaking	Num. 49
a) First Reason	Num. 50
b) Second Reason	Num. 65
2. Further Clarification of the Question	Num. 66
a) What is caused in the Intellect of the Hearing Angel	Num. 67
b) How an Angel speaks to One Angel and not to Another	Num. 81
II. To the First Question	Num. 84
III. To the Principal Arguments of the First Question	Num. 89
IV. To the Principal Arguments of the Second Question	Num. 92
V. To the Arguments for Henry’s Opinion	Num. 123

Tenth Distinction

   

Single Question: Whether all Angels are Sent	Num. 1
I. To the Question	Num. 4
II. To the Principal Argument for Each Side	Num. 7

Eleventh Distinction

       

Single Question: Whether a Guardian Angel can effectively cause Something in the Intellect of the Man whose Guardian he is	Num. 1
I. To the Question
A. The Opinion of Avicenna	Num. 6
B. Scotus’ own Opinion	Num. 12
1. An Angel cannot effectively cause anything in the Intellect of the Man whose Guardian he is Num. 13
2. What an Angel can do in the Intellect of the Man whose Guardian he is	Num. 15
II. To the Principal Arguments	Num. 27

The Twelfth Distinction (on matter and form in corruptible things)

is lacking in the Ordinatio. See the Appendix.

Thirteenth Distinction

      

Single Question: Whether Light Generates Illuming as its Proper Sensible Species	Num. 1
I. To the Question	Num. 9
A. What Light is	Num. 10
B. What Illuming is	Num. 13
C. How Illuming is Generated by Light	Num. 18
II. To the Principal Arguments	Num. 33

Fourteenth Distinction

         

Question 1: Whether a Celestial Body is a Simple Essence	Num. 1
I. According to the Philosophers	Num. 3
II. According to the Theologians	Num. 12
III. Scotus’ Opinion	Num. 24
Question 2: Whether there is any Movable Heaven other than the Starry Heaven	Num. 25
I. To the Question	Num. 30
A. All Astronomers Agree that there are at least Nine Heavens	Num. 31
B. Astronomers Disagree whether there are more than Nine Heavens	Num. 38
II. To the Principal Arguments	Num. 53

The Fifteenth to Twenty Fifth Distinctions are lacking in the Ordinatio. See the Appendix

[Fifteenth Distinction: Whether in a mixed body the elements actually remain in substance Sixteenth Distinction: Whether the image of the Trinity consists in three really distinct powers of the rational soul
Seventeenth Distinction: About the origin of Adam’s soul and the place where it was produced Eighteenth Distinction: About the production of woman and the seminal reasons Nineteenth Distinction: Whether we had immortal bodies in the state of innocence
Twentieth Distinction: About the offspring of Adam had any been procreated in the state of innocence Twenty First Distinction: About the veniality or gravity of Adam’s sin
Twenty Second Distinction: Whether Adam’s sin came from ignorance
Twenty Third Distinction: Whether God could make a rational creature’s will impeccable by nature Twenty Fourth Distinction: Whether the superior part [sc. of the intellect] is a distinct power from the inferior part
Twenty Fifth Distinction: Whether anything other than the will causes efficaciously an act of willing in the will]

Twenty Sixth Distinction

      

Single Question: Whether Grace is in the Essence or in a Power of the Soul	Num. 1
I. To the Question
A. The Opinion of Others	Num. 11
B. Rejection of the Opinion	Num. 14
C. Scotus’ own Opinion	Num. 24
II. To the Principal Arguments	Num. 27

Twenty Seventh Distinction

     

Single Question: Whether Grace is a Virtue	Num. 1
I. To the Question
A. First Opinion	Num. 4
B. Scotus’ own Opinion, already Proposed by Others	Num. 8
II. To the Principal Argument	Num. 15

Twenty Eighth Distinction

        

Single Question: Whether Man’s Free Choice without Grace can Guard against all Mortal Sin	Num. 1
I. To the Question
A. The Opinion of Others, Proposed in Two Versions	Num. 8
B. Rejection of the Opinion
1. Against the Conclusion in Itself	Num. 11
2. Against the Two Versions of the Argument in particular	Num. 17
C. Scotus’ own Response	Num. 21
II. To the Principal Arguments	Num. 27

Twenty Ninth Distinction

      

Single Question: Whether Original Justice in Adam must be Set Down as a Supernatural Gift	Num. 1
I. To the Question
A. The Opinion of Henry of Ghent	Num. 6
B. Scotus’ own Opinion	Num. 13
II. To the Principal Arguments	Num. 20
III. To Certain Statements of Henry of Ghent	Num. 26

Thirtieth to Thirty Second Distinctions

                  

Question 1: Whether Anyone Propagated according to the Common Law from Adam contracts Original Sin	Num. 1
Question 2: Whether Original Sin is Lack of Original Justice	Num. 9
Question 3: Whether the Soul contracts Original Sin from Infected Flesh, Sown in Concupiscence	Num. 17
Question 4: Whether Original Sin is Remitted in Baptism	Num. 24
I. To all the Questions at Once
A. Opinion of Others
1. Exposition of the Opinion	Num. 27
2. Doubts against the Opinion	Num. 35
B. Scotus’ own Opinion, which is taken from Anselm	Num. 48
1. What Original Sin is	Num. 50
2. Whether Original Sin is in Everyone Propagated in the Common Way	Num. 54
3. How Original Sin is Contracted	Num. 67
4. How Original Sin is Remitted by Baptism	Num. 68
II. To the Principal Arguments
A. To the Arguments of the First Question	Num. 69
B. To the Arguments on both Sides of the Second Question	Num. 76
C. To the Arguments on both Sides of the Third Question	Num. 82
D. To the Arguments of the Fourth Question	Num. 88

Thirty Third Distinction

   

Single Question: Whether only the Lack of the Divine Vision is Due as Punishment for Original Sin	Num. 1
I. To the Question	Num. 8
II. To the Principal Arguments	Num. 13

Thirty Fourth to Thirty Seventh Distinctions

                                       

Question 1: Whether Sin is from Good as from a Cause	Num. 1
Question 2: Whether Sin is per se a Corruption of Good	Num. 10
Question 3: Whether Sin is a Punishment for Sin	Num. 15
Question 4: Whether Sin can be from God	Num. 20
I. To the Second Question
A. Sin is Formally the Privation of Good	Num. 33
B. Of which Good Sin is Formally the Privation	Num. 34
1. Opinions of Others	Num. 35
2. Rejection of the Opinions	Num. 36
3. Scotus’ own Solution	Num. 46
4. Four Queries about Sin and their Solution	Num. 52
a. To the First Query	Num. 53
b. To the Second Query	Num. 59
c. To the Third Query	Num. 61
d. To the Fourth Query	Num. 63
C. To the Principal Arguments
II. To the First and Fourth Questions
A. To the First Question	Num. 67
1. Sin is from Good	Num. 71
2. How Sin is from Good as from its Cause
a. Opinions of Others	Num. 76
b. Possible Solution	Num. 95
Question 5: Whether the Created Will is the Total and Immediate Cause with Respect to its Willing, such that God does not Have, with Respect to that Willing, any Immediate Efficient Causality but only a Mediate One	Num. 96
α. Opinion of Others	Num. 97
β. The Response to the Fourth Question that Falls out from the Aforesaid Opinion of Others	Num. 113
γ. Instances against the Opinion of Others and Solutions to them	Num. 114
δ. Rejection of the Opinion	Num. 119
3. How Sin is from the Created Will	Num. 124
B. To the Fourth Question	Num. 129
1. The Opinion of Others	Num. 130
2. Objections to the Reasons for the Opinion of Others	Num. 134
3. Scotus’ own Opinion and Solution to Objections	Num. 142
C. To the Principal Arguments of the First Question	Num. 155
D. To the Principal Arguments of the Fourth Question
1. To the Arguments of the First Part	Num. 162
2. To the Arguments of the Second Part	Num. 167
III. To the Third Question
A. Solution	Num. 170
B. To the Principal Arguments	Num. 183

Thirty Eighth Distinction

   

Single Question: Whether Intention is an Act of Will only	Num. 1
I. To the Question	Num. 8
II. To the Principal Arguments	Num. 13

Thirty Ninth Distinction

         

Question 1: Whether Synderesis is in the Will	Num. 1
Question 2: Whether Conscience is in the Will	Num. 7
I. To both Questions
A. Opinion of Henry of Ghent
1. Statement of the Opinion	Num. 12
2. Rejection of the Opinion	Num. 13
B. Scotus’ own Response	Num. 19
II. To the Principal Arguments of the First Question	Num. 21
III. To the Principal Arguments of the Second Question	Num. 26

Fortieth Distinction

   

Single Question: Whether Every Act gets Goodness from the End	Num. 1
I. To the Question	Num. 6
II. To the Principal Arguments	Num. 12

Forty First Distinction

     

Single Question: Whether any Act of Ours can be Indifferent	Num. 1
I. To the Question
A. Opinion of Others	Num. 5
B. Scotus’ own Opinion	Num. 6
II. To the principal Arguments	Num. 17

Forty Second Distinction [page 343]

 

Single Question: Whether Sins are Distinguished into Capital Sins

Num. 1

Forty Third Distinction

     

Single Question: Whether a Created Will can Sin from Malice	Num. 1
I. Opinion of Others
A. Statement of the Opinion	Num. 2
B. Rejection of the Opinion	Num. 3
II. Scotus’ own Opinion	Num. 5

Forty Fourth Distinction

   

Single Question: Whether the Power to Sin is from God	Num. 1
I. To the Question	Num. 4
II. To the Principal Argument	Num. 8