SUBSCRIBER:


past masters commons

Annotation Guide:

cover
The Ordinatio of John Duns Scotus
cover
Ordinatio. Book 4. Distinctions 14 - 42.
Book Four. Distinctions 14 - 42
Fifteenth Distinction
Question Three. Whether he who Causes a Loss to Another in the Goods of his Person, as Body or Soul, is Bound to Make Restitution so he Can be Truly Penitent
II. To the Initial Arguments

II. To the Initial Arguments

245. As to the first argument [n.214], it is plain how it is possible to restore a good of the soul in the first article, and a good of the body in the second - by making restitution with corresponding exterior goods or, for killing, with corresponding spiritual goods to the one killed.

46. To the second argument [n.215] I say that if he has drawn back someone already obligated to Religion (I mean, by obligation of profession), he is bound to restitution, namely that he go back to Religion. But if he has drawn someone back from entering, then, because there is a difference between ‘having’ and ‘being close’, he is not bound to as great a restitution to Religion as he would be if he had been in Religion; but he is bound to some sort of restitution, for example to some sort of inducement of another, who is in some sort of way equivalent, to entry into that Religion. And this is to be understood if he had drawn him back with the intention of causing loss to Religion. However, if he did so with the intention of consulting, without fraud, his own proper utility, he is not bound to Religion. But in the first case and the second he is bound to the person whom he drew back, in persuasions and other spiritual goods, to an equivalence in those goods in which, by drawing him back, he caused him loss.