[Appendix] Twentieth Distinction

Question One. Whether in the state of innocence procreated sons would at once have been confirmed in justice

Scotus, Sent.2 d.20 q.1
Thomas, ST Ia q.100
Richard of St. Victor, Sent.2 d.20 q.3
Durandus, Sent.2 d.20 q.5

1. About the twentieth distinction the first question to ask is whether in the state of innocence everyone would have been confirmed in good.

2. That we would have been: from Anselm Why God Man 1.18, ‘If the first parents had so lived that they would not have sinned at the start, they would, along with their progeny, have been so confirmed in good that they could no longer sin.’

3. On the contrary: they would have been wayfarers, therefore they were not confirmed [in good]. The antecedent is plain, because the good angels and our first parents were all wayfarers. For there is a state of meriting only while one is on the way, and merit precedes reward. The consequence is plain, because only that act is meritorious which is right and yet could have failed to be right. About Christ however there is a special difficulty, which will be discussed in Book 3.

To the Question

4. I reply by saying that there is a double confirmation [in good]. One is perfect where no one can sin, and only the blessed have it. The other is less perfect, which those had who were sanctified in the womb, and the Apostles had it after the sending of the Holy Spirit. But since in this way there is no sinning in fact, though the potency for sinning remains, there could be a doubt whether original justice would have been infused by Adam into his sons. I say that it would not have been, but that it would have been given to anyone by God’s free generosity, since it is a supernatural gift. But would the son have had this justice because of the merit of the parents? I say not by proportional merit, although God would so have ordained it that, if the first parents had overcome the first temptation, God would, of his own free generosity, have given this justice to all of Adam’s descendants.

5. To Anselm [n.2] I say that either he is expressing an opinion and not asserting, or he is speaking of the second sort of confirmation stated above [n.4],     etc .

Question Two. Whether in the state of innocence only those would have been born who are now the elect.

Scotus, Sent.2 d.20 q.2

1. The second question to ask is whether only those would then have been born who are truly elect.

2. That not so: because many now are born elect from parents who are not elect, therefore      etc.

3. To the contrary is Gregory Moralia 4 at the end.

To the Question

4. I reply by saying that no one now reprobate would have been then produced, and that no one now elect would have not then been produced.

5. I prove the first as follows: God foresaw from eternity all the men capable of being produced, and all the final merits and demerits of each one. Therefore these propositions are incompossible, namely that God foresaw that Judas must act with final badness, that John would abide in innocence, and that he accidentally produced Judas [sc. in the state of innocence].

6. I prove the second thus: God foresaw that the Blessed Virgin had to be acting with final goodness if he produced her, and in fact things are such that he did produce her accidentally.     Therefore then too he would have produced her accidentally, otherwise the state of innocence would have harmed her without her guilt etc     .

7. But would children have grown up as they do now? I say that they would at first have been ignorant, and that they would have increased in knowledge and also in virtue; and so they would at first have been weak and incapable of local motion, and they would have increased in strength of body.

To the Argument

8. To the first objection [n.2] I say that numerical unity of efficient cause is not of necessity required for numerical unity of effect; the fact is plain because, as to the numerically same body that nature produces, God can repair what was not present; and I do not say that those who are now born elect and of reprobate parents would have been born of their same parents as elect, etc.