.
Order of Contents
Intro
Sentences
. Detailed ToC
Commentaries
. Biblios 4
. English 6+
. Latin 75+
On Lombard 8+
Theology of 2
On the Sentences 4
On the Commentaries 6
.
Intro
Lombard’s Influence
Peter Lombard (c. 1096–1160) was the fountainhead of what is now known as systematic theology in the Western tradition in Church history. His Four Books of Sentences, or collected theological judgments spanning the gamut of theology, has likely been the most influential book of systematic theology ever in Church history.
While some persons contemporary to the Lombard produced systematic works of theology before him, Peter’s set a trajectory for the scholasticism that followed. It became a standard not only used in the schools across Europe, but a requirement to be commented on in order to earn a doctoral degree, even up through the 1500’s (still after Aquinas’s Summa began to be systematically commented on).
Medieval scholasticism has been called, “the abutement against which the bridge of all later Protestant theology leans,”¹ and in consistency with this, Martin Luther, the great Protestant reformer, wrote a commentary on the Master’s Sentences (below) before taking his degree. Calvin referenced Lombard and his Sentences dozens of times in his Institutes. Sentence commentaries continued to be written through the 1700’s.
¹ Willem J. van Asselt, Introduction to Reformed Scholasticism (RHB, 2011), p. 194
History has preserved over 1,700 Sentence commentaries,¹ though only a fraction of them have been published. Nearly every Medieval theologian of importance wrote one, below. Most all the commentaries remain in Latin, though Aquinas’s is in English, as well as two books of Bonaventure’s (on God and sacraments). A handful of small selections from other authors have also been translated.
¹ Per A Digital Repertory of Commentaries on Peter Lombard’s Sentences
As of the making of this webpage, this collection of over 80 Sentence commentaries is the largest and most convenient on the net. Yet there are still many more out there, many of which may be easily found on PRDL.
.
The Sentences
The Sentences have been greatly neglected in the contemporary era, according to both their theological merit and historical value, only having been translated into English in 2007, and that by a very specialized publisher.
The work, from its opening Prologue, is devoutly pious. Lombard’s intention was to collect the orthodox teachings of Christ’s Church before him on common topics and elucidate, compare and harmonize the fathers where able, while refuting the influence of errors and heresies, in order to set forth and defend the catholic (universal) faith. The Sentences are a gateway into some of the best writings of the fathers.
As Lombard did not answer every question he posed (humbly recognizing his own limitations), it left ample opportunity for others after him to further the discussion (and seek to answer the questions!). Most of the Sentence commentaries are not mere commentaries: they regularly take up a related (and sometimes new) question and expound it with their own original material and viewpoints, furthering the continuing conversation, all set in backdrop to all that has gone before. To adeqautely understand that conversation, one needs to go back to its inception, where Lombard framed the issues.
The detailed table of contents to the Sentences has been translated below (with links to the Latin) so you can get a feel for what is in it. Book one is on God and the Trinity, book two on creation, angels, man, the Fall and sin, book three on Christ and virtues, book four on the sacraments, Church power, marriage and the last things.
While many criticisms may be legitimately given of Lombard’s theology¹ (it was Medieval in orientation and already Romanist at key points) and the scholastic trajectory it facilitated, yet there is more legitimate (and edifying) detailed theology and historic awareness in the Sentences than in most modern systematic theologies. The good infused throughout it amply repays the errors that may be passed over by the mature student of theology.
¹ See (2) Faults of Medieval Scholastic Theology in the Intro to ‘Where Reformed Orthodox Writers Agreed & Disagreed with Aquinas’.
.
Sentence Commentaries
Needless to say, Lombard’s commentators comprise a massive corpus of thought by many of the brightest minds in Church history on these theological topics, where one can not only find a few or several discussions on nuanced points (sometimes found nowhere else), but a whole host of them. When Reformed theologians needed greater solid depth in divinity, they often resourced Medievals who had already provided the detailed, cogent paradigms.
To unearth a wealth of material, find the book, distinction and chapter number in Lombard where he may treat of your subject. Then go to a handful of the prominent commentaries (which are usually well organized) on that book, distinction and chapter number.
The English puritan Richard Baxter said:
“Our students would not ordinarily read [Thomas] Aquinas, [John Duns] Scotus, Ariminensis [Gregory of Rimini], Durandus, etc. if there were not in them abundance of precious truth which they esteem… There are very few points of the Protestant doctrine, which I cannot produce some Papist or other to attest.” A Key for Catholicks (London: R.W., 1659), ch. 50, pp. 365–66
Aquinas, Scotus, Rimini and Durand are all below. Rimini in particular was a favorite of the Reformed, as he had strongly taught Augustinian predestination against semi-Pelagianism and as he advocated for limited atonement. Detailed tables of contents have been translated and linked below for Scotus, Rimini, Luther and Lambert Daneau, for your accessibility.
.
The Reformed Daneau on the Sentences
The French Daneau (d. c. 1590), a major reformed theologian, wrote a commentary on (only) book one of the Sentences, on God, sifting and critiquing for the Reformed where the Master went wrong. In the opening Prologue Daneau surveys and critiques in detail the origin and development of scholasticism as well as Lombard and his followers. The end of the volume includes appendices on the distinctive teachings of Lombard and his errors about the Trinity, as compared with “the healthy and old doctrine of the Trinity out of the orthodox symbols [creeds] and ancient synods.”
In sum, in seeking to purify what had come down to them in the Medieval inheritance and pass over the chaff, Daneau and the Reformed held to a more simple paradigm of the Trinity in contrast to Lombard (with his followers following), who were willing to delve into the specifics of the modes of the Trinity’s personal relations. Doing so, though for the purpose of refuting those who clearly erred about those modes, often created tension, or contradiction, to more basic principles of the Trinity, as Daneau shows from the earlier creeds and fathers.
We have not found other protestants besides Luther and Daneau which commented on Lombard. All the commentaries besides Luther and Daneau are Medieval or Romanist.
May this collection of Lombard, his commentators and studies around them be helpful to you in further looking into and understanding the things of our Lord and the deveolopment of Christ’s Church.
.
This page was last updated in Aug., 2024.
.
.
Lombard’s Sentences in English
The Sentences, vol. 1, (bk. 1, Trinity), 2 (bk. 2, Creation), 3 (bk. 3, Incarnation), 4 (bk. 4, Sacraments) trans. Giulio Silano Pre 1, 2, Ref 3, 4 (c. 1150; Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 2007) ToC 1, 2, 3, 4
Lombard (c. 1096–1160) was an Italian scholastic theologian and bishop of Paris. For background on the Sentences, see Wikipedia.
Bk. 4 distinctions 1-26 (of 50) (Sacraments) in Elizabeth F. Rogers, Peter Lombard & the Sacramental System (Merrick, NY: Richwood Pub. Co., 1976), pp. 79-246
.
.
Lombard’s Sentences in Latin
Libri IV Sententiarum, vol. 1 (bks. 1-2), 2 (bks. 3-4) 2nd ed. (c. 1150; Florence: College of St. Bonaventura, 1916) Detailed ToC 1, 2, 3, 4 Unique Positions of Lombard
This is a critical edition. The numbers below on the right are to the number of chapters in each Distinction.
.
Concise ToC
Prologue 1
Bk. 1, God
1. Enjoyment & Use 3
2. Divine Essence’s Unity 5
3. Knowledge of the Creator through the Created 4
4. Divine Generation & Divine Predication 2
5. Whether the Divine Essence Generates 3
6. Principle of the Son’s Generation 1
7. Commonness of the Generative Principle 2
8. Divine Essence 8
9. Generation of the Son 5
10. Procession of the Spirit 3
11. Procession of Spirit from Father & Son 2
12. Order between Father & Son regarding Procession of Spirit 2
13. Procession of Spirit in comparison to Generation of Son 4
14. Temporal Procession of Spirit 3
15. Sending the Spirit 10
16. Visible Sending of the Spirit 2
17. Invisible Sending of the Spirit 6
18. Holy Spirit as Gift 6
19. Equality of Divine Persons 12
20. Equality in Power 3
21. Exclusive Diction in the Divine 3
22. Names Designating the Divine Essence & Persons 4
23. On the name ‘Person’ 6
24. Names signifying Unity & Plurality in the Divine 1
25. Signification of ‘Person’ in the Plural 4
26. Personal Properties 7
27. Properties themselves in their Connection with the Person’s Names 5
28. Non-Personal Notions 7
29. Common Spiration 4
30. Names said from the Time 2
31. Divine Appropriations 6
32. Comparison of the Persons 6
33. Relation of Person, Essence & their Properties 2
34. Persons in Comparison to the Divine Essence 5
35. God’s Knowledge 9
36. How the Realities that God Knows are in Him 5
37. How God is in Realities 9
38. On the Causality & Ineffability of the Divine Knowledge 2
39. How God’s Knowledge is a Cause 4
40. Predestination 2
41. Causality of Predestination 3
42. God’s Power 3
43. Limitlessness of the Divine Power 1
44. God’s Power Limited to the Quality of Things? 2
45. God’s Will 7
46. Evil & the Efficacy of the Divine Will 7
47. Efficacy of the Divine Will 3
48. Conformity of our Will to the Divine Will 4
Bk. 2, Creation
1. Procession of Created Things 6
2. Creation of the Purely Spiritual Creatures 6
3. Condition of the Angels at their Creation 6
4. Condition of the Angels Relative to Glory & Wretchedness 1
5. Conversion & Fall of the Angels 4
6. Effects of the Fall of the Angels 7
7. Angels’ Power 10
8. Angels & the Assumption of Bodies 4
9. Good Angels’ Dignity 7
10. Angelic Acts following on the Orders 2
11. Angelic Guardianship 2
12. Work of Creation 6
13. Work of Distinction 7
14. Formation of the Firmament 10
15. Work of Adornment 10
16. On the Creation of Man 4
17. The Creation of the Man 7
18. Creation of the Woman 7
19. Man’s Original Immortality 6
20. Human Generation 6
21. Fall of our First Parents 8
22. Man’s First Sin 6
23. Divine Permission 4
24. Man’s Natural Power before the Fall 13
25. Conditions of Free Decision 9
26. Grace 7
27. Virtue 12
28. Errors about Grace 4
29. Grace in the State of Innocence 6
30. Original Sin 15
31. Principle of Original Sin 7
32. End of Original Sin 8
33. Whether Original Sin is One or Many 5
34. Actual Sin: Evil 5
35. Substance of Actual Sin 6
36. Relation between Sin & Punishment 6
37. Causality of God as regards Sin & Punishment 2
38. The Will 4
39. Will & Vice 3
40. External Act of Sin 1
41. Questions about the Act of Sin 4
42. Parts & Modes of Sin 8
43. Sin Against the Holy Spirit 1
44. Power to Sin 2
Bk. 3, Christ & Virtues
1. Incarnation 3
2. Nature Assumed in the Incarnation 3
3. How the Human Nature was Assumed 4
4. Agencies behind the Conception of Christ 3
5. On the Union in the Incarnation 3
6. Mode of Union 6
7. Interpretation of Expression Signifying the Union 3
8. What belongs to the Divine Nature on Account of the Union 2
9. What belongs to the Human Nature on Account of the Union 1
10. What belongs to the Divine Person on Account of the Union 3
11. Christ as Creature 3
12. Defects of his Human Nature as Created 3
13. Perfections Assumed through the Union 1
14. Christ’s Knowledge & Power as Man 2
15. Defects Assumed in the Incarnation 4
16. Necessity of his Suffering & Death 2
17. Christ’s Will 3
18. Christ’s Merit as Ordered to the Good 5
19. Christ’s Merit as Ordered to taking away Evil 7
20. Causes of the Passion 6
21. Death & Resurrection of Christ 2
22. Things that Follow Christ’s Death 4
23. The Virtues 9
24. Faith in Relation to its Object 3
25. On the Articles of Faith 5
26. Hope 5
27. Charity 8
28. Command to Love One’s Neighbor 4
29. Order of Charity 3
30. Order of Charity as regards Merit 1
31. Duration of Charity 3
32. God’s Charity for Us 5
33. The Cardinal Virtues 3
34. The Gifts 9
35. Gifts of Wisdom & Knowledge 3
36. Interconnection of the Virtues 3
37. Precepts of the Law 6
38. Lying 5
39. Perjury 12
40. The Two Precepts pertaining to the Heart’s Desire 3
Bk. 4, Sacraments
1. Sacraments in General
2. Sacraments of the New Law 5
3. Baptism in Itself 9
4. Effects of Baptism 7
5. Causes of Baptism 3
6. Conditions for Baptism 7
7. Confirmation 5
8. Eucharist 7
9. Reception of Eucharist 3
10. Christ’s Body in Eucharist 2
11. Sacrament & Reality in Eucharist 6
12. Appearance & Effects of Eucharist 6
13. Minister of the Eucharist 2
14. Definition of Penance 5
15. Requirements for Penance 7
16. Parts of Penance 6
17. Comparing the Parts of Penance 5
18. Power of the Keys 8
19. Use of the Keys 4
20. Temporal Aspects of Penance 7
21. Purgatory & Confession 9
22. Effect of Penance 2
23. Extreme Unction 4
24. Sacrament of Holy Orders 19
25. Conferral of Holy Orders 7
26. Matrimony 6
27. Cause of Matrimony 10
28. Marital Consent 4
29. Impediment of Compulsion 1
30. Impediment of Error 4
31. Goods of Marriage & Marital Act 8
32. Marital Debt 4
33. Development of Marriage 4
34. Personal Impediments 6
35. Fornication 4
36. Impediment of Slavery 4
37. Holy Orders & Uxoricide 2
38. Religious Vows 3
39. Mixed Marriages 7
40. Consanguinity 4
41. Affinity 9
42. Spiritual Relationship 7
43. Resurrection of the Body 7
44. Those who will Rise 8
45. Before the General Judgment 6
46. Divine Justice & Mercy 5
47. General Judgment 5
48. Second Coming 5
49. Rewards of the Blessed 4
50. Separated Souls & the Damned 7
.
Detailed Table of Contents for The Sentences in Latin
Prologue
Bk. 1, God
Bk. 2, Creation
Bk. 3, Christ, Virtues
Bk. 4, Sacraments
Prologue
Bk. 1, God
1. Enjoyment & Use
1. Every doctrine concerns things and/or signs
2. On the things which one is to enjoy and/or to use, and on those who use and enjoy
3. What is it ‘to use’ and ‘to enjoy’?
2. Divine Essence’s Unity
1. On the Trinity and unity
2. What was the intention of those writing of the Trinity?
3. What order is to be observed when dealing with the Trinity?
4. On the testimonies of the Old Testament by which the mystery of the Trinity is declared
5. On the testimonies of the New Testament pertaining to the same
3. Knowledge of the Creator through the created
1. On the cognition of God through the creatures, in which the vestige of the Trinity appears
2. On the image and similitude of the Trinity in the human soul
3. On the similitude of the creating and created trinity
4. On the unity of the Trinity
4. Divine Generation & Divine Predication
1. Whether God the Father begot God Himself?
2. Whether the Trinity may be predicated of the one God, as the one God of the three Persons?
5. Whether the Divine Essence Generates
1. Whether the divine essence begot the Son, and/or is begotten by the Father, and/or whether the Son is born from it, and/or the Holy Spirit proceeds from it?
2. That the Son is not from nothing, but of somthing or someone,
not however from matter, just as also is the Holy Spirit
3. Why the word of the Father is called the Son of his nature
6. Principle of the Son’s Generation
1. Whether the Father begot the Son by will, or by necessity; and whether God is willing and/or unwilling
7. Commonness of the Generative Principle
1. Whether the Father could and/or willed to beget the Son
2. Or whether there is some power in the Father that can beget the Son, which is not in the Son
8. Divine Essence
1. On the truth and property of the divine essence
2. On the incommutability of the same
3. On the simplicity of the same
4. On the corporal and spiritual creature, in what manner it be multiple and not simple
5. That God, though He be simple, is nevertheless spoken of in a multiple manner
6. That God’s simplicity is subject to none of the predicaments
7. That God is abusively said to be a substance
8. That there is not in God anything that is not God
9. Generation of the Son
1. On the distinction of the three Persons
2. On the coeternity of the Father and of the Son
3. On the ineffable and intelligible manner of the generation
4. Whether there ought to be said: God always is begotten, and/or always has been begotten
5. On the objections of the heretics striving to prove that the Son is not coeternal with the Father
10. Procession of the Spirit
1. That the Holy Spirit is properly said to be the Love of the Father and of the Son
2. That the same names are properly and universally accepted
3. That the Holy Spirit, just as He is common to the Father and to the Son, so has a common proper name
11. Procession of Spirit from Father & Son
1. That the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, whom, however, the Greeks disavow to proceed from the Son
2. On the Agreement of the Latins and the Greeks in sense, and their difference in words
12. Order between Father & Son regarding Procession of Spirit
1. Whether the Holy Spirit proceeds before and/or more fully from the Father than from the Son
2. That the Holy Spirit is said principally and properly to proceed from the Father
13. Procession of Spirit in comparison to Generation of Son
1. Why is the Holy Spirit, since He is from the substance of the Father, not said to be begotten, but only proceeding?
2. Why is the Son said to proceed, when the Holy Spirit is not said to be begotten?
3. That a mortal cannot distinguish between the generation of the Son and the procession of the Holy Sprit
4. Whether the Holy Spirit ought to be said to be unbegotten, since He is not begotten
14. Temporal Procession of Spirit
1. On the twin procession of the Holy Spirit, the temporal and eternal
2. That not only the gifts of the Holy Spirit, but also the Holy Spirit Himself is given and sent to men
3. Whether or not holy men could give the Holy Spirit
15. Sending the Spirit
1. That the Holy Spirit is given by Himself, and the Son is sent by Himself
2. In what manner is the mission of each to be understood
3. That the Son has also been sent by the Holy Spirit
4. That the Son has also been given by Himself
5. In what manner this must be understood: ‘I have not come on my own’
6. Whether the Son has been sent only once, or often
7. On the two manners of the Son’s mission
8. That according to one manner He has been sent once, according to the other often; and according to one manner He is said (to have been) sent into the world, according to the other He is not
9. For what reason is the Father not said to be sent
10. That the Son and the Holy Spirit are not as ones lesser than the Father, because they have been sent
16. Visible Sending of the Spirit
1. On the mission of the Holy Spirit, which comes to be in two manners, visibly and invisibly
2. That the Son, according to which He is man, is not merely less than the Father, but also less than the Holy Spirit
17. Invisible Sending of the Spirit
1. That the Holy Spirit is the charity, by which we love God and neighbor
2. That fraternal love is God, and not the Father and/or the Son, but only the Holy Spirit
3. That this verse: ‘God is charity’, has not been said in the manner of a cause, as this verse: ‘Thou art my patience and my hope.’
4. In what manner the Holy Spirit is sent and/or given to us
5. Whether the Holy Spirit is increased in a man, and/or is less and more had and/or given, and whether He is given to one having and to one not having
6. That some say that the charity of God and neighbor is not the Holy Spirit
18. Holy Spirit as Gift
1. Whether it must be conceded that gifts are given through a gift
2. Whether the Holy Spirit is said to be ‘a gift’ for the same reason that He is said to be given or granted
3. That just as the Son, by being born, accepted not only, ‘to be the Son’, but also ‘to be the Essence’, so the Holy Spirit by proceeding accepted not only ‘to be a gift’, but ‘to be the Essence’
4. That the Holy Spirit is said to be a ‘gift’ and a ‘granted’ according to the two aforesaid manners of procession, who, according to which He is a gift, is referred to the Father and the Son; and according to which (He is) a given, (it is referred) to Him who gives and to those to whom He is given
5. Whether the Son, since He has been given to us, can be said to be ‘ours’, as the Holy Spirit is
6. Whether the Holy Spirit is referred to Himself
19. Equality of Divine Persons
1. On the equality of the three Persons
2. That eternity and magnitude and power in God is one, even if they seem to be diverse
3. That none of the Persons exceeds the other in magnitude, because one Person is not greater than the other, nor are two something more than one, nor three than two and/or one
4. In what manner is the Father said to be in the Son and the Son in the Father, and the Holy Spirit in each
5. That none of the Persons is a part in the Trinity
6. For what reason are the three Persons said to be most highly one
7. When we say that the three Persons are the one essence, neither do we predicate it as a genus of species nor as a species of individuals, because it is not that the essence is a genus and a Person a species, and/or the essence a species and the Persons individuals
8. That neither according to a material cause are the three Persons said to be the one essence
9. Nor are the three Persons thus said to be the one essence, as three men are one in nature and/or of one nature
10. Whether the three Persons differ in number, who have been distinguished by properties
11. For what reason are the three Persons together not something greater than one (Person)
12. That God is not to be said to be “threefold,” but “triune”
20. Equality in Power
1. That none of the Persons exceeds another in power
2. That the Son is no less able than the Father
3. On the objections of heretics against this, and the response of Catholics
21. Exclusive Diction in the Divine
1. In what manner can there be said: ‘the Father alone’, and/or ‘the Son alone’ and/or ‘the Holy Spirit alone’, since They are inseparable
2. Whether there ought to be said: ‘the Father alone is God’, and/or ‘the Son alone is God’, and/or ‘the Holy Spirit alone is God’; or whether, ‘the Father is the only God’, ‘the Son is the only God’, ‘the Holy Spirit is the only God’
3. In what manner is the Trinity said (to be) God alone, since He is with the spirits and the souls
22. Names Designating the Divine Essence & Persons
1. On the difference of the names, which we use speaking of God
2. On those which convene with God temporally and are said relatively
3. On this name which is “Trinity”
4. On those which properly pertain to each Person, and on those which signify the unity of the essence
23. On the name ‘Person’
1. On this name which is “Person”, since it is said according to substance, it is accepted not singularly, but plurally in the Most High
2. By what necessity has there been said by the Latins “three Persons”, and by the Greeks “three Hypostases and/or substances”
3. For what reason do we not say that the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are “three Gods”, since we do say that they are “three Persons”
4. Why do we not say “three essences”, since (we do say) “three Persons”
5. That in the Trinity there is not a diversity and/or singularity and/or solitude, but a unity and a Trinity and distinction and identity
6. That God ought not be said (to be) “manifold”
24. Names signifying Unity & Plurality in the Divine
1. What is signified by these names: “one”, “two”, “three”, “triune” and/or “trinity”, “many” and/or “plurality”, “distinction” and/or “distinct”, when we use them, speaking of God
25. Signification of ‘Person’ in the Plural
1. What is signified by this name “Person” in the plural number, that is, when there is said “Persons”
2. On the threefold acceptance of this name “Person” in the Trinity
3. Out of which sense is there said: One, the Person of the Father, another, the Person of the Son, another, that of the Holy Spirit; or the Father is one in person, the Son another, the Holy Spirit another
26. Personal Properties
1. On this name “hypostasis”
2. On the properties of the Persons and on the names relative to these
3. That not all names are said of God according to substance; for certain ones are said according to relation, however nothing is said according to accident
4. For what reason is it said that it is proper to the Only-Begotten to be the Son of God, since even men are the sons God
5. That a man is said to be a “son” of the Trinity, and the Trinity, the “father” of men
6. That the Holy Spirit is said to be “the Gift” by the same property by which He is said to be “the Holy Spirit”, and in each manner relatively to the Father and the Son
7. Whether the Father and/or the Son and/or the Trinity itself can be said to be a “holy spirit”
8. That not all the names which are said relatively respond, according to their terms, to one another in reverse
27. Properties themselves in their Connection with the Persons’ Names
1. What are those properties by which the Persons are distinguished
2. That it is not entirely the same to say that He is the Father and that He has begotten and/or has a Son
3. That the properties determine the hypostases, not the substance, that is, the nature
4. On the general rule for those which regard themselves, and for those which are said relatively
5. Or whether according to substance there is said “God from God”, and sayings of this kind
28. Non-Personal Notions
1. That there are not only three properties of the Persons.
2. Whether the Father alone ought to be said to be “not-begotten” and/or “not-a-son”, just as He is said to be “unbegotten”
3. On the property which “unbegotten” notes
4. The response of St. Ambrose against the Arians concerning the Unbegotten
5. Whether ‘to be a father’ and ‘to be a son’ is diverse
6. Whether wisdom is said to be begotten according to relation, and/or according to substance
7. On “image”
29. Common Spiration
1. On principium
2. That from eternity the Father is a principle and the Son, but not the Holy Spirit
3. In what manner the Father is the principle of the Son, and He with the Son the principle of the Holy Spirit
4. Whether the Father and the Son are the principle of the Holy Spirit according to the same notion
30. Names said from the Time
1. On those names, which are said of God temporally and relatively according to an accident, which accedes not to God, but to creatures
2. Whether the Holy Spirit is said to have been given and/or granted relatively to Himself, since He is given by Himself
31. Divine Appropriations
1. Whether the Son is said to be “equal” and/or “similar” to the Father according to substance
2. On the sentence of Saint Hilary, by which he shows the names proper to the Persons in the Trinity
3. For what reason is “unity” attributed to the Father
4. For what reason are the Father and the Son said to be unum (one thing) and/or unus Deus (one God), but not unus (“one” in the masculine)
5. Why there is said to be an equality in the Son
6. Why in the Holy Spirit there is said to be virtue, concord and/or a connection
32. Comparison of the Persons
1. Whether the Father and/or the Son love by that love, which proceeds from each, that is, by the Holy Spirit
2. Whether the Father is wise by the Wisdom which He begot
3. Whether the Son is wise by Himself and/or through Himself
4. Whether there is only one Wisdom of the Father
5. Just as in the Trinity there is love, which is the Trinity, and yet the Holy Spirit is the Love, which is not the Trinity, nor for that reason are there two loves; so also concerning Wisdom
6. For what reason is the Father not said (to be) wise by the Begotten Wisdom, just as He is said (to be) loving by the Love which proceeds from Him
33. Relation of Person, Essence & their Properties
1. Whether the properties of the Persons are the Persons themselves, and/or the divine ousia (being)
2. In what manner can the properties be in the nature of God and not determine It
34. Persons in Comparison to the Divine Essence
1. On the words of St. Hilary, by which he seems, according to the intelligence of the depraved, to say, that the divine nature and the thing of the nature is not the same, and that God and what God is, is not the same
2. Whether there can be said “one God of three Persons”, as there is said, “one essence of three Persons”, and whether there can be said “three Persons of one God”, as there is said “three Persons of one essence”
3. That power, wisdom, and goodness are sometimes referred in Scripture to the Persons distinctly
4. For what reason is power attributed to the Father, wisdom to the Son, goodness to the Holy Spirit, since there is one power, wisdom and goodness of the three
5. On this name homoousion (one being), where is it received in authority, and what does it signify
35. God’s Knowledge
1. On God’s knowledge, foreknowledge, providence, disposition and predestination
2. What does His foreknowledge and/or foresight concern?
3. What does His disposition concern?
4. What does His predestination concern?
5. What does His providence concern?
6. What does His wisdom and/or knowledge concern?
7. Whether foreknowledge and/or disposition could belong to God, if there were no future things?
8. That God’s knowledge concerns things temporal and eternal.
9. In what manner are all said to be “in God” and to be “life in Him”?
36. How the Realities that God Knows are in Him
1. Whether all ought to be said to be in God’s Essence as they are said to be in God’s Cognition and/or foreknowledge
2. By what reckoning are good things said to be in God, and not evil ones
3. Whether it is the same that all are “from God” and “through Him” and “in Him”
4. That all are in any of the three, both through Him and in Him
5. That not all which are ex Deo (from God), are also de ipso (of Himself)
37. How God is in Realities
1. In what manners God is said to be in things
2. That God does not dwell, wheresoever He is, but the other way around
3. Where God was before there was a creature
4. That God, though He is in all things essentially, yet is not completely befouled with sordid things
5. Since God is everywhere and always, yet does not belong to a place, He is moved neither according to place nor according to time
6. In what manners is something said to belong to a place, and/or be circumscribable
7. What is it to be changed according to time
8. Whether created spirits belong to a place and are circumscribable
9. That God is everywhere without local movement
38. On the Causality & Ineffability of the Divine Knowledge
1. Whether the knowledge and/or foreknowledge of God is the cause of things, and/or the other way around
2. Whether God’s foreknowledge can fail
39. How God’s Knowledge is a Cause
1. Whether God’s Knowledge can be increased and/or lessened and/or in any manner be changed
2. Whether God can newly either know in time and/or foreknow something
3. Whether God can know more than He knows
4. That God, both always and together, knows all
40. Predestination
1. Whether anyone predestined can be damned and/or any reprobate be saved
2. What is God’s reprobation, and in whom is it considered, and what is the effect of predestination?
41. Causality of Predestination
1. Whether there is anything meriting obduration and/or mercy
2. On the various opinions of carnal men on this
3. Whether those which God once knows and/or foreknows, He always knows and foreknows, and always had known and had foreknown
42. God’s Power
1. On the omnipotence of God; for what reason is He said to be “omnipotent”, since we can do many things which He Himself cannot do
2. In what manner is God said to be able to do all things
3. That the omnipotence of God is considered according to two acts
43. Limitlessness of the Divine Power
1. An invective against those who say that God can do nothing but what He wills and does
44. God’s Power Limited to the Quality of Things?
1. Whether God can make something better than He has made it, and/or in another and/or better manner than He has
2. Whether God can always do everything which He could do
45. God’s Will
1. On God’s will, which is God’s essence, and on its signs
2. That though for God it is the same to will as to be, yet God cannot be said to be all which He wills
3. On the understanding of these expressions: God knows, and/or God Wills”, “God knows all and/or wills something”
4. That God’s most highly good will is the cause of all which naturally are, the cause of which is not to be sought, because it is the first and most high cause of all
5. In what manners is (the term) God’s “will” accepted
6. That God’s preception, prohibition, permission, counsel, and operation are sometimes understood by the name of “will”
7. Whether God wills from all persons that to be done those things which He commands, and/or not to be done those things which He prohibits
46. Evil & the Efficacy of the Divine Will
1. That God’s will, which He Himself is, can be cancelled in nothing
2. In what manner is this to be understood: “I willed to gather thy children together, and thou wouldst not”, and this: “He who wills all men to come to be saved”
3. Whether evils come to be done by God willing and/or nilling
4. In what manner is this saying of St. Augustine to be understood: “It is good that evils come to be”
5. On the multiple acceptation of the term “good”
6. That evils have value for the university of things
7. That the cause that man is worse, is not in God
47. Efficacy of the Divine Will
1. That the will of God regarding a man is fulfilled whithersoever he turns himself
2. In what sense certain things are said to be done “against” God’s will
3. For what reason did God command to all to do good and avoid evil, but does not will that this be fulfilled by all
48. Conformity of our Will to the Divine Will
1. That man sometimes with goodwill wills something other than God wills, and with bad-will sometimes wills the same which God wills
2. That God’s will is fulfilled through the evil wills of men
3. Whether it pleased holy men that Christ would suffer and die
4. Whether we ought to will the sufferings of the saints
Bk. 2, Creation
1. Procession of Created Things
1. That there is one beginning principle, not many
2. What it is to create, what to make
3. According to what reckoning are words of this kind, “to do,” “to make,” said of God
4. For what reason has a rational creature been made, that is man and/or angel
5. In what manner man is said (to have) been made “for the sake of the reparation of the downfall of the angels”
6. For what reason has man been thus instituted, that (his) soul has been united to a body
2. Creation of the Purely Spiritual Creatures
1. On the angels, when they were made
2. That nothing was made before heaven and earth
3. That together with time and with the world the spiritual and corporal creature began
4. Where were the angels then created?
5. That the mater of (things) visible and the nature of invisibles was created together, and each formless
6. In what manner did Lucifer say, “I shall ascend into Heaven”?
3. Condition of the Angels at their Creation
1. Angels of what kind were made?
2. Whether all the angels were equal in essence, wisdom and liberty of judgment?
3. What common and equal goods did the angels have?
4. Whether they were created good, and/or evil, and whether there was any delay between their creation and fall?
5. On the threefold wisdom of the angels before their downfall and/or confirmation
6. Whether they had any love for God and/or for themselves before the downfall?
4. Condition of the Angels Relative to Glory & Wretchedness
1. Whether the angels were created perfect and blessed, or wretched and imperfect?
5. Conversion & Fall of the Angels
1. On the confirmation and conversion of those standing, and the aversion and lapse of those falling
2. Briefly touches upon free will
3. Whether anything had been given to those standing, by which they were converted
4. Which grace the angels needed, and which they did not
5. Whether their aversion is to be imputed to their falls
6. Whether the beatitude, which the standing accepted in confirmation, they merited through some grace apportioned at that time
6. Effects of the Fall of the Angels
1. That of the greater and lesser angels, certain ones fell down, among whom one was loftier, namely Lucifer
2. Whence and whither they were cast down
3. For what reason has it not been conceded to them to dwell in Heaven, and/or on earth
4. On the prelations of the demons
5. Whether all the demons are in this gloomy air, or whether some are in Hell
6. On the power of Lucifer
7. Whether demons, once conquered by the saints, thereafter approach other men
7. Angels’ Power
1. Whether good angels can sin, and/or evil angels uprightly live
2. That though each have free will, yet they cannot be bent to each
3. That the good angels have a more free judgment after their confirmation than before
4. That the good angels cannot sin from their nature, just as they could before
5. In what manners evil angels may know the truth of temporal things
6. That the arts of magic prevail by the virtue and knowledge of the Devil, which is theirs from God
7. That the matter of visible things does not serve the evil angels at will
8. That the evil angels are not creators, though through them mages make frogs and other things; just as neither do the good angels, even if through their ministry creatures come to be
9. That God alone so works the creation of things, just as He does the justification of the mind
10. That evil angels can do many things through their own natural vigor, which they cannot do on account of God’s prohibition
8. Angels & the Assumption of Bodies
1. Whether all angels are corporeal?
2. On the forms, according to which God appeared, and on those, in which the angels appear
3. That God in the appearance, according to which He is God, never has appeared to mortals
4. In what manner demons are said “to enter” into men
9. Good Angels’ Dignity
1. On the distinction of the angelic orders
2. What is named an “order”? and what is the reason for the name for each?
3. That those names have been taken from the gifts of grace, and have been given them not for their own sake, but for our sake.
4. Whether these orders were distinguished from the start of creation?
5. Whether all angels of the same order are equal?
6. In what manner does Scripture say that the tenth order is to be completed from men?
7. Whether men are assumed in accord with the number of the standing and/or of the lapsed spirits?
10. Angelic Acts following on the Orders
1. Whether all the celestial spirits are sent?
2. Whether “Michael”, “Gabriel”, and “Raphael” are names of orders, and/or of spirits?
11. Angelic Guardianship
1. That souls have each a good angel to guard them and an evil angel to exercise them
2. Whether angels make progress in merit and reward up until the Judgment?
12. Work of Creation
1. On the distinction of the Six Days
2. That some thought that all things were made in matter and form, others that this happened through intervals of time
3. In what manner corporal things were founded through intervals of time
4. In what sense are the tenebrae (darknesses) said to be something, and in what sense they are said not to be something?
5. For what reason is that confused matter said to be “formless”? and where it came to be, and how ever so much did it ascend on high?
6. On the four manners of divine operation
13. Work of Distinction
1. On the work of the first distinction
2. On the light made on the First Day, whether it was spiritual or corporal?
3. Where was it made?
4. In what manners “day” is accepted
5. On the natural order of the computation of days, and on that, which was introduced as a mystery
6. On the understanding of these words: “God said”
7. In what sense the Father is said “to work in the Son” and/or “through the Son”, and/or “in the Holy Spirit”
14. Formation of the Firmament
1. On the work of the Second Day, on which the firmament was made
2. Which heaven ought to be understood to have been made then
3. From which matter was it made?
4. In what manner can waters be above the sky, and what kind are they?
5. On the shape of the firmament
6. Why Scripture is silent concerning the blessing of the work of this day
7. On the work of the third day, when the waters were gathered together into one
8. How all the waters were gathered together into one place, even though there are many seas and rivers
9. On the work of the Fourth Day, on which the luminaries of heaven were made
10. In what manner is this to be accepted: “Let them be for signs and seasons?”
15. Work of Adornment
1. On the work of the fifth day, on which the swimming and flying creatures were made
2. On the work of the sixth day, on which were created the animals and creeping things of the land
3. On venomous and harmful animals
4. Whether the smallest creatures were created at that time?
5. Why man was made after all things
6. On the sentence of those who contend that all things were made together
7. In what manner is God’s “rest” to be understood?
8. In what manner is it to be accepted that God is said to have completed His work on the Seventh Day, when He then rested?
9. In what manner are all things made by God said to be “very good”?
10. On the sanctification of the seventh day
16. On the Creation of Man
1. On the creation of man
2. What kind of man was made?
3. On the image and similitude to which man was made
4. Why man is said to be an “image” and “made to the image”, but the Son is not said to be “made to the image”?
17. The Creation of the Man
1. On the creation of the soul, or whether it was made from something?
2. On the insufflation and inspiration of God; when was the soul made, whether in the body, or outside of it?
3. At what age man was made
4. Why man, having been created outside of Paradise, was placed in paradise
5. In which manners is “paradise” accepted?
6. On the Tree of Life
7. On the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil
18. Creation of the Woman
1. On the formation of the woman
2. For what reason was she formed from the side of the man, and not from another part of his body?
3. For what reason was the rib withdrawn from the man sleeping, and not waking?
4. Why was she made from a rib, multiplied in itself without the addition of any extrinsic thing?
5. On superior and inferior causes
6. Of the causes which are at once in God and in creatures, and of those which are only in God
7. On the soul of the woman, which is not from the soul of the man, because souls are not on account of a transduction
19. Man’s Original Immortality
1. On the state of man before the sin, such as it was according to the body, and such as it was after the sin
2. In what manner is man said to have been made into a living soul?
3. The body of man before sin was mortal and immortal, after sin: dead
4. Whether the immortality which it then had was from the condition of its nature, or whether it was out of the benefice of a grace?
5. Whether man could live forever using the other trees and not the Tree of Life, with God not commanding that he eat from the Tree of Life?
20. Human Generation
1. Of the manner of the procreation of children if the first humans had not sinned
2. Why they did not come together (sexually) in Paradise
3. On the manner of translation to what is better, if they had not sinned
4. Whether if they came to stand in perfection, and with the use of their members, they may have procreated children?
5. Whether even they may have been born with little sense (in contrast to maturity of mind)
6. Of the two goods: this is given, the other is promised
21. Fall of our First Parents
1. On the envy of the Devil, by which he approached to tempt our first parents
2. On the form, in which he came
3. On the serpent’s cunning
4. Whether the Devil chose the serpent, to tempt through him?
5. On the manner of the temptation
6. On the twofold species of temptation
7. Why is the sin of man, and not (that) of Angel, is remediable?
8. That not only to the man was the precept given
22. Man’s First Sin
1. On the origin of that sin
2. On the elation of the woman
3. On the elation of the man
4. Who was more delinquent, the man, or the woman?
5. On excusable and inexcusable ignorance
6. Whether a will preceded that sin?
23. Divine Permission
1. For what reason did God permit, that man be tempted, whom He knew was going to fall?
2. Of what kind was man, according to his soul, before the sin?
3. On the threefold knowledge of man before the Fall
4. Whether man was prescient of those things which were going to be for him?
24. Man’s Natural Power before the Fall
1. On the grace and power of man before the Fall
2. On the help given man in creation, by which he was able to stand
3. On free will
4. On man’s sensuality
5. On man’s reason and its parts
6. On the similar order of sinning in us and in our first parents
7. That in us is the man and the woman and the serpent
8. On the spiritual marriage of man and woman in us
9. In what kind of manner is temptation consummated in us through those three?
10. When the woman alone eats the forbidden food
11. When the man also eats
12. When is sin venial and/or mortal?
13. In which manners “sensuality” is accepted in Scripture
25. Conditions of Free Decision
1. The definition of “free will” according to the philosophers
2. In what kind of manner is ‘free will’ accepted in God
3. That the Angels and Saints have free will
4. That free will will be freer, when it will not be able to sin
5. On the difference of the liberty of judgment according to diverse times
6. On the four states of free will
7. On the corruption of free will through sin
8. On the three manners of liberty of judgment: from necessity, from sin, from misery
9. On the liberty, which is on account of grace, and which is on account of nature
26. Grace
1. On operating and cooperating grace
2. What is a will?
3. Which is the grace prevenient to good will?
4. That the good will, which is anticipated by grace, is prevenient to certain gifts of God
5. That the thought of good precedes faith
6. That understanding is prevenient to both the thought of and the delectation in the good
7. Whether man works the good, through free will, without grace
27. Virtue
1. Whether the grace which is said to be “operating” and “cooperating” is the same?
2. In what manner grace merits to be increased
3. On the three kinds of goods
4. Among which goods is free will?
5. On virtue, what is it, and what is its act?
6. On the grace, which liberates the will, if it is, and/or is not, a virtue?
7. In what manner good merits start out of grace, and of which grace is this understood?
8. That good will is principally said to be a “grace”
9. According to which reckoning is faith said “to merit justification”?
10. On the gifts of the virtues, and on the grace, which is not a merit, but which causes merit
11. That the same is the use of virtue and the use of free will, but of virtue principally
12. Certain authors think, that the virtues are the good uses of free will, that is, of the act of the mind
28. Errors about Grace
1. On the Pelagian heresy
2. That the Pelagians use the sayings of St. Augustine in testimony of their error
3. In what manner St. Augustine determined those words in his Retractations
4. On the heresy of Jovinian and Mani, which St. Jerome crushed with one blow
29. Grace in the State of Innocence
1. Whether man before original sin was in need of operating and cooperating grace?
2. If man had the virtues before the Fall
3. On the ejection of man from Paradise
4. In what manner is this to be understood: “Lest he take of the Tree of Life and live forever”?
5. On the flaming sword placed before the gates of Paradise
6. Whether man ate of the Tree of Life before the sin?
30. Original Sin
1. That through Adam sin and punishment passed unto his descendents
2. Whether that sin which passed unto all men was original or actual?
3. Certain ones think that it was the original one
4. In what manner they assign that it entered into the world
5. That it was truly the original sin which passed into his descendents
6. What is original sin?
7. That original sin is a fault
8. That original sin is said to be the fomes (kindling tender) of sin, that is, concupiscence
9. What is understood by this name of “concupiscence,” which is the fomes of sin
10. That through Adam original sin, that is concupiscence, entered into all
11. Whether the sin, in which all have sinned, is the original one?
12. Out of which sense has it been said that “through the disobedience of one many have been constituted sinners”? (Rom. 5:19)
13. That the original sin was in Adam and is in us
14. In what manner are all said “to have been in Adam” when he sinned, and “to have descended from him”?
15. That nothing extrinsic is converted into the human substance which is out of Adam
31. Principle of Original Sin
1-2. In what way original sin may be transmitted from the fathers to the children; and whether according to the soul or according to the flesh
3. That through the flesh sin passes over (traducatur), and in what way, is shown
4. The cause of the flesh’s corruption is shown, from which the sin is in the soul
5. Why sin is said to be in the flesh
6. Whether the cause of original sin, which is in the flesh, is guilt, or a punishment
7. Why it is called “original sin”
32. End of Original Sin
1. In what manner original sin is forgiven in baptism
2. Whether the foulness which one contracts out of the violent passion of one’s parents is washed away in baptism?
3. Whether God is the author of that concupiscence?
4. Why is that sin imputed to the soul?
5. Whether the former sin is necessary, and/or voluntary?
6. Why God joins the soul to the body, knowing that it will be stained thereby
7. Whether souls on account of their creation are equal in natural gifts?
33. Whether Original Sin is One or Many
1. Whether little ones bear from their origin the sins of all their preceding parents, as they do the sin of Adam?
2. In what manner in that one first sin several are found
3. Whether the sin of Adam is more grave than all the others?
4. Whether that sin was forgiven for our first parents?
5. In what manner are the sins of parents visited and not visited upon their sons?
34. Actual Sin: Evil
1. On actual sin
2. What the origin and cause of the first sin was
3. What was the secondary cause of evils?
4. On which account the cause of evils is not but in a good thing?
5. That in these matters the rule of dialectics concerning contraries deceives
35. Substance of Actual Sin
1. What is a sin?
2. On sin
3. Whether an evil act, inasmuch as it is a sin, is a corruption and/or privation of the good?
4. In what manner can sin corrupt a good, since it is nothing?
5. In what kind of manner man distances himself from God
6. Whether a punishment is a deprivation of a good?
36. Relation between Sin & Punishment
1. Certain acts are a sin and a punishment for sin, certain ones a sin and a cause of sin, but others a sin and a cause of and a punishment for sin
2. Whether a sin is a cause of sin inasmuch as it is a sin?
3. That not every sin is a punishment for sin
4. Whether some sins are essentially punishments for sin?
5. That, though a sin be a punishment for sin, the sin is from the man, the punishment from God
6. On certain acts which are undoubtedly sins and punishments, and inasmuch as we suffer by them, are not sins
37. Causality of God as regards Sin & Punishment
1. That some think that evil acts are in no manner from God
2. Out of what sense has it been said: “God is not the author of evil”?
38. The Will
1. Of the will and its end
2. Which is the good end, even charity
3. That all good willings have one end, yet some reach to diverse ends
4. Of the difference between the willing, intention and end
39. Will & Vice
1. Why a willing is called a sin when it is of natural things, none of which of those is sin
2. Why an act of the will is a sin if the act of the other powers are not sins
3. In which sense is it said every man naturally wills the good?
40. External Act of Sin
1. Whether from the end all acts ought to be weighed, so that out of the affect or end all acts are good or evil?
41. Questions about the Act of Sin
1-2. Whether every intention and act of unbelievers is bad?
3. In what way are these phrases to be understood: “Sin, so far, is a voluntary thing,” “Nowhere is sin except in the will,” and “None is sinful except by the will.”
4. That an evil willing is a voluntary sin
42. Parts & Modes of Sin
1. Whether a bad willing and action in the same thing, and around the same thing, are one sin, or plural
2. If a sin is committed by someone, is it in him so far as he is penitent?
3. “Guilt” is understood in what ways?
4. Of the modes of sins
5. By what does a shortcoming (delictum) and sin differ?
6. Of the seven principal vices
7-8. Of pride (superbia)
43. Sin Against the Holy Spirit
1. Of the sin against the Holy Spirit
44. Power to Sin
1. Of the power to sin, whether of a man or a devil, is it from God?
2. Whether to resist at anytime is with reference to the power? [Rom. 13:2]
Bk. 3, Christ & Virtues
Thus is treated: In the fulness of time, as the apostle says, God sent his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, that those which are under the law may be redeemed and hence the we may receive the adoption of the sons of God.
1. Why the Son assumed flesh, not the Father or the Holy Spirit
2. Whether the Father or Holy Spirit had been able to be incarnate
3. Whether the Son, which only took flesh, did something which the Father and Holy Spirit did not
2. Nature Assumed in the Incarnation
1. Why he took a whole human nature, and what by the name of humanity or human nature is understood
2. Of the union of the Word and the flesh by the soul mediating
3. That the Word assumed simultaneously the flesh and the soul, nor is the flesh first conceived, then assumed
3. How the Human Nature was Assumed
1. Of the flesh assumed, of what quality was it antecedently
2. That no one is without this sin, except the Virgin
3. Why Christ did not tithe in Abraham as Levi
4. Why the flesh of Christ is not called sinful, but the likeness of it
4. Agencies behind the Conception of Christ
1. Why the (formation of the) incarnation is attributed to the Holy Spirit since it is a work of the Trinity
2. Why it is said Christ was conceived and born of the Holy Spirit
3. Why the apostle says Christ was made, whom we confess was born
5. On the Union in the Incarnation
1. Whether a Person or the (divine) nature assumed a person or the (human) nature, and if the nature of God was incarnate
2. Whether the divine nature ought to be said to have been made flesh
3. Why He did not take a human person, since they (opponents) labor to prove He assumed a man
6. Mode of Union
1. Of the understanding of these sayings: “God is man” and “God was made man;” he puts forth three judgments
2. The first of these which they say: In the incarnation a certain man out of soul and flesh was constituted, and that man was made to be God, and God that man; and the authorities by which they so assert he puts forth
3. The second of these which they say: that man out three substances, or out of two natures, was constituted; and this they confess to be one person, before the incarnation only simply, but in the incarnation composite; and the authorities by which they fortify it are proposed
4-6. The third of these: They deny a sole person from the natures is composed, yet they also deny that some man or some substance out of the flesh and soul is composed there; and thus those two, even the soul and flesh, the Word is uniting, they say; so some substance or person is not combined out of these things; but with these two things God is clothed, as it were, with a garment, so it may appear to mortal eyes; which rule of the incarnation they by practice accept
7. Interpretation of Expression Signifying the Union
1-2. Next, by what singular opinions the adversaries are seen, he puts forth
3. That one ought not to say “the lordly man”
8. What belongs to the Divine Nature on Account of the Union
1. Whether the divine nature ought to be said to be born of a virgin
2. Of the double nativity of Christ, by which ways He was born
9. What belongs to the Human Nature on Account of the Union
1. Of the worship (adoration) exhibited to Christ’s humanity
10. What belongs to the Divine Person on Account of the Union
1. Whether Christ, as a man, may be a person, or some thing
2. Whether Christ as a man is an adopted son
3. Whether the person or nature was predestined
11. Christ as Creature
1-2. Whether Christ is a creature, or was made
3. Whether that man always was
12. Defects of his Human Nature as Created
1. Whether God was able to take another, or from elsewhere than of the stock of Adam
2. If that man (Christ) was able to sin, or not be God
3. If God was able to assume a human in the female sex
13. Perfections Assumed through the Union
1. Of the wisdom and grace of Christ the man, whether in these He was able to progress
14. Christ’s Knowledge & Power as Man
1. If Christ’s soul had wisdom equal with God and if He knows everything which God does
2. Why God did not give to his soul power for all things, and so knowledge (of all)
15. Defects Assumed in the Incarnation
1. Of the human defects which Christ assumed
2. Of the passion and affection of fear, or sorrow
3. On some difficult topics of Hilary: pains of suffering which move from Christ’s flesh are looked at
4. Of Christ’s sorrow and its cause, according to the same
16. Necessity of his Suffering & Death
1. Whether in Christ was the necessity to endure and die, which is a general defect
2. Of the (four) states of man and what Christ took on of each one
17. Christ’s Will
1-2. If every prayer or willing of Christ was fulfilled
2. Of some topics of Ambrose and Hilary, where is treated of Christ’s doubt and fear
18. Christ’s Merit as Ordered to the Good
1. If Christ merited for Himself and us, and what for Himself and what for us
2. That from conception Christ merited for Himself the same as through his suffering
3. Of that which is written, “He bestowed on Him the name that is above every name.” (Phil. 2:9)
4. If Christ without any merit willed to have that which He obtained by merit
5. Of the cause Christ’s suffering and death
19. Christ’s Merit as Ordered to taking away Evil
1-4. In what way Christ redeemed us through death from the Devil, sin and punishment
5-6. Whether Christ, the sole redeemer, ought so to be called the sole Mediator (in respect to the Father and Holy Spirit)
7. According to what nature is He a mediator
20. Causes of the Passion
1-4. That by another way (than Christ’s death) He is able to liberate (man from sin)
5-6. Of the tradition of Christ being made from Judas, by God, from Jews
21. Death & Resurrection of Christ
1. Whether in Christ’s death his soul or body was separated from the Word
2. By what rule Christ is said to have died and suffered
22. Things that Follow Christ’s Death
1. Whether Christ in death was a man
2. Whether Christ, wheresoever He is, is a man
3. That the whole (totus) Christ is everywhere, but not the whole thing (totum); so the whole (totus) is man or God, but not the whole thing (totum).
4. Whether that which they say of God or of the Son of God, they are able to say of that man or of the son of man
23. The Virtues
1. Whether Christ had faith, hope and charity
2-3. What is faith and in how many ways is it called
4. What is it to believe concerning God, or in God or to believe God
5. Of the unformed quality of the mind, which is in a bad Christian
6. In what way it is called, “one faith” (Eph. 4:5)
7-8. That faith is of the things which are not seen, properly, of themselves, yet it is seen from that in which it is
9. Why faith alone is called a foundation
24. Faith in Relation to its Object
1. In what way is understood that which is written: “So when it is come to pass, you all may believe” (Jn. 13:19)
2. Whether Peter had the faith of suffering when he saw that man (Christ) suffer
3. Whether in any way those things are perceived which are believed
25. On the Articles of Faith
1. Of the faith of the ancients
2. Of faith simply
3. What may have sufficed to have been believed before the advent
4. Of the faith of Cornelius
5. Of the equality of faith, hope and charity, and of works
26. Hope
1. Of hope, what it is
2. Of which things hope is
3. How faith and hope differ
4. Whether in Christ there was faith or hope
5. Whether in Hell (Limbo of the Fathers, or Purgatory) the just have faith and hope
27. Charity
1. Of the love (charity) of God and neighbor which is in Christ and in us
2. What is charity
3. Whether God and neighbor are loved (diligitur) with the same charity
4. Why two commandments of charity are spoken of
5. Of the way one ought to love (diligendi)
6. Of the fulfillment of that command: “Love (Diliges) God from your whole heart”
7. That the one commandment is in the other
8. Which things are to be loved with charity
28. Command to Love One’s Neighbor
1. Whether we are commanded to love our whole neighbor and our whole selves
2-4. That in the love of neighbor is included the love of angels
29. Order of Charity
1. Of the order of loving (diligendi), what is first, what after
2. Whether all men are to be equally loved (diligendi)
3. Of the grades of charity
30. Order of Charity as regards Merit
1. If it is better to love enemies than friends
31. Duration of Charity
1. Whether charity holds at any time with falling away
2. Why faith, hope and wisdom are said to be emptied, and not charity, when it is itself out of a part (like faith, hope and wisdom)
3. Whether Christ served the order of love (to, as a creature, love all men as Himself) rather than us (the elect) [The answer splices out whether Christ had a saving will for all or only for the elect, and answers the latter]
32. God’s Charity for Us
1. Of the charity of God
2-3. In what way God is said to love more or less this or that
4. If any is loved more or less by God at one time more than another
5. If God from eternity love has loved reprobates
33. The Cardinal Virtues
1. Of the four principal virtues
2. Whether they were in Christ and are in angels
3. Of the uses of them
34. The Gifts
1. Of the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit
2. Whether they are virtues, and are in angels
3. Whether there were in Christ
4. Of the distinction of fears
5. Of pure (fear) and servile, and initial
6. In what pure and servile (fear) differ
7. That servile and initial fear are called the beginning of wisdom, but differ
8. In what way a pure fear remains in eternity
9. If the fear of punishment, which was in Christ, was servile or initial
35. Gifts of Wisdom & Knowledge
1. Of wisdom (sapientia) and knowledge (scientia), and by what they differ
2. In what wisdom differs from understanding (intellectu)
3. Whether understanding and knowledge (scientia), which are numbered among the gifts, are those which man may have naturally
36. Interconnection of the Virtues
1. Of the connection of the virtues, which are not separated
2. Whether all the virtues are equal in whoever they are in
3. In what way the whole law depends on charity
37. Precepts of the Law
1-3. Of the Ten Commandments, in what way they are contained in the two
4-6. Of the commandments of the Second Table
38. Lying
1. Of the threefold genera of lying
2. Of the eight species of lying
3-4. What is a lie; what is to deceive
5. In what things it errs with risk, or not
39. Perjury
1-3. Of perjury
4. Whether swearing may be evil
5. Of an oath that is through creatures
6. What swearing may be grave, and whether such is by God, by creatures or by the Gospel
7. What it is to say: (I swear) “by God”
8. Of those which swear by false gods
9-11. That an oath or promise made contra God does not hold
12. Of him which forces someone to swear
40. The Two Precepts pertaining to the Heart’s Desire
1. Why the law is said to restrain the hand, not the soul
2. What is the letter that kills
3. Of the difference between the Law and the Gospel
Bk. 4, Sacraments
1. Sacraments in General
1. On the Sacraments.
2. What is a Sacrament.
3. What is a sign.
4. How sign and Sacrament differ.
5. Why the Sacraments have been instituted.
6. On the difference of the Old and New Sacraments.
7. On circumcision.
8. The remedy which they had, who were before circumcision.
9. On the institution of circumcision and its cause.
10. On the little ones departed before the eighth day, on which circumcision was done.
2. Sacraments of the New Law
1. On the sacraments of the New Law
2. On baptism
3. On the difference between Christ’s & John’s baptism
4. What was the usefulness of John’s baptism
5. Whether that baptism was a sacrament
6. On the form of John’s baptism
3. Baptism in Itself
1. What is baptism
2. On the form of baptism
3. That the apostles baptized in Christ’s name
4. If baptism may be given in the Father or of the Holy Spirit only
5. Of the institution of baptism
6. Why it is done only with water
7. Of immersion; how many times it ought to be done
8. When circumcision lost its power
9. Of the cause of the institution of baptism
4. Effects of Baptism
1. On those which receive the sacrament and the thing, and the thing and not the sacrament, and the sacrament and not the thing
2. Of those who approach under false pretenses
3. In what way that is understood: “As many of you as are baptized in Christ, you have put on Christ.”
4. That passion, or faith, or contrition fills the role of baptism
5. What profit is baptism to those who come to it with faith
6. What is remitted in baptism to the righteous
7. Of what thing is the baptism (which a righteous person receives) a sacrament
5. Causes of Baptism
1. That baptism is equally good whether given by a good or a wicked person
2. On the power of baptism and on ministry
3. What was the power of baptism that Christ could, and did not, give to servants
6. Conditions for Baptism
1. For whom it is lawful to baptize
2. Whether those who were baptized by heretics are to be re-baptized
3. That no one is baptized within the mother’s womb
4. Whether there is a baptism, if the words are uttered in a corrupt form
5. Of one who is immersed in jest
6. On the response of the sponsors
7. On catechism and the exorcism
7. Confirmation
1. On the sacrament of confirmation
2. That it can be conferred by none other than the highest priests
3. What is the power of this sacrament
4. Whether this sacrament is more worthy than baptism
5. Whether it may be repeated
8. Eucharist
1. On the sacrament of the altar
2. That a prefiguration of this sacrament occurred in the Old Testament, as was also the case with baptism
3. On the institution of this sacrament
4. On the form
5. Why Christ gave this sacrament to the disciples after other food
6. On the sacrament and the thing
7. That the sacrament’s thing is twofold
9. Reception of Eucharist
1. On the two manners of eating
2. On the error of those who say that the body of Christ is received only by the good
3. On the meaning of some ambiguous words
10. Christ’s Body in Eucharist
1. On the heresy of those who say that the body of Christ is not on the altar, except in the sign
2. On the testimonies of the saints, by which it is proved that the true body of Christ is on the altar
11. Sacrament & Reality in Eucharist
1. On the manner of the change
2. How the body of Christ is said to be made from the substance of the bread
3. Why it is received under another species
4. Why under a double species
5. Why it is mixed with water
6. What was the nature of the body which Christ gave to his disciples at the Supper
12. Appearance & Effects of Eucharist
1. In what do those accidents inhere
2. On the breaking and the parts
3. On the confession of Berengar
4. What those parts signify
5. Whether Christ is immolated on the altar every day, and whether that which the priest does is a sacrifice
6. On the cause for its institution
13. Minister of the Eucharist
1. Whether this sacrament is confected by heretics or excommunicates
2. What makes a heretic, and what is a heretic
14. Definition of Penance
1. On penance
2. Why it is called penance
3. What is penance
4. On the solemn and one penance
5. That sins are remitted through penance frequently
15. Requirements for Penance
1. That one who is bound by many sins cannot truly repent of one of them, unless he repent of all
2. For what reasons scourges befall
3. On the Egyptians and the inhabitants of Sodom, who are said to be punished temporally lest they perish in eternity
4. On the kinds of alms
5. What are alms
6. Whether those who remain in mortal sin and give abundant alms ought to be said to make satisfaction
7. Whether the good works done by some wicked people are effective for the meriting of (eternal) life, once they are converted to the good
16. Parts of Penance
1. On the three things which are to be considered in penance, namely compunction, confession, satisfaction
2. What is true satisfaction
3. What is false satisfaction
4. On the three actions of penance
5. On the multitude of venial sins which is as much a burden as one great sin
6. On satisfaction for venial sins
17. Comparing the Parts of Penance
1. Whether sins are remitted without confession
2. Whether it is sufficient to confess to God alone
3. That it does not suffice to confess to God alone, if it is possible to confess to a priest
4. Whether it suffices to confess to a layman
5. For what is confession effective
18. Power of the Keys
1. On the remission which the priest gives
2. On the keys
3. On the use of the keys
4. Whether a priest can remit or retain a sin
5. How priests remit sins or retain them
6. How priests bind in, or absolve from, sins
7. How that text is to be understood: Whatever you shall loose, etc.
8. What are the inward darkness and stain
19. Use of the Keys
1. When these keys are given and to whom
2. Whether grace is transmitted to the worthy through the unworthy
3. How that text is to be understood: “I shall curse your blessings.”
4. What should an ecclesiastical judge be like
20. Temporal Aspects of Penance
1. Of those who repent at the end
2. Of those who do not complete their penance
3. Of those to whom an undiscerning priest enjoins a punishment
4. That satisfaction is not to be imposed on the dying, but only to be made known to them
5. That penance or reconciliation is not to be denied in case of necessity
6. That the priest is not to reconcile anyone without consulting the bishop, except in necessity
7. Whether the offering is to be accepted of one who, while running to penance, is prevented by death
21. Purgatory & Confession
1. On the sins which are remitted after this life
2. Of those who build gold, silver, precious stones, hay, stubble
3. On the purgatorial fire, by which some are purged more quickly, others more slowly
4. What it means to build wood, hay, stubble
5. What it means to build gold, silver, precious stones
6. That one truly repents, although not of every venial sin
7. What is general confession
8. That none is to confess sins which he has not committed
9. On the punishment of the priest who makes public the sin of one who has confessed
22. Effect of Penance
1. Whether remitted sins return
2. What is the sacrament, and what the thing
23. Extreme Unction
1. On the sacrament of extreme unction
2. On the three kinds of anointing
3. By whom was this sacrament instituted
4. On the repetition of this sacrament
24. Sacrament of Holy Orders
1. On ecclesiastical orders, how many they are
2. Why there are seven
3. Of what quality are to be those who are received into the clergy
4. On the crown and tonsure
5. On the door-keepers
6. On lectors
7. On exorcists
8. On acolytes
9. On subdeacons
10. On deacons
11. On priests
12. Which are called sacred orders
13. What is called an order
14. On the terms of “dignity” and “office”
15. On the bishop
16. On the pontiff
17. On the fourfold order of bishops (patriarchs, archbishops, metropolitans, bishops)
18. On the seer
19. On the cantor
25. Conferral of Holy Orders
1. Of those ordained by heretics
2. On simony: from what is it so called, and what it is
3. Of those who are ordained by simoniacs knowingly or unknowingly
4. Of those who say they purchase corporal things, and not spiritual things
5. On the distinction of simoniacs
6. Of those who are ordained forcibly by heretics or other simoniacs
7. Of the age of candidates for ordination
26. Matrimony
1. On the sacrament of marriage
2. On its institution and cause
3. When is marriage contracted according to precept, and when according to indulgence
4. In what ways indulgence is understood
5. That nuptials are good
6. Of what thing is marriage a sacrament
27. Cause of Matrimony
1. What things are to be considered in marriage
2. What is marriage
3. On the consent which makes the marriage
4. When does a marriage begin to be
5. On the opinion of some who say that there is no marriage before the carnal joining
6. That a spouse can choose a monastery without the other spouse’s consent
7. That a marriage partner cannot profess continence without the other’s consent
8. On adulterous marriages
9. That “spouse,” whether masculine or feminine, is taken in several senses
10. Which spouse is a widow at her spouse’s death, and which not
28. Marital Consent
1. Whether future consent, even if confirmed with an oath, makes a marriage
2. What things pertain to the substance of the sacrament, and what to its decorum
3. Whether the consent that effects marriage is given to carnal joining, cohabitation or something else
4. Why the woman was formed from the side of the man
29. Impediment of Compulsion
1. That there is no lawful consent where there is coercion
30. Impediment of Error
1. On the error which nullifies consent
2. On the marriage of Mary and Joseph
3. On the final cause of marriage
4. That a bad end does not contaminate the sacrament
31. Goods of Marriage & Marital Act
1. On the three goods of marriage
2. On the twofold separation
3. Of those who procure poisons of sterility
4. When those who procure an abortion are murderers
5. On the excusal of coitus which is done for the goods of marriage
6. On the indulgence which the apostle allows
7. On the evil of incontinence
8. On the pleasure of the flesh, which is a sin and which not
32. Marital Debt
1. On the satisfaction of the carnal debt
2. That continence is to be practiced by common consent
3. When is there to be abstinence from coitus
4. At what times nuptials are not to be celebrated
33. Development of Marriage
1. On the diversity of marriage laws
2. Whether John’s virginity is to be preferred to Abraham’s chastity
3. What was the marriage custom under the law
4. To whom was it then lawful to have several wives or not
34. Personal Impediments
1. On lawful persons
2. On whether the frigid are to be separated or not
3. Of those who cannot have intercourse because they are impeded by sorcery
4. On the insane
5. Of those who sleep with two sisters
6. That a wife is not to be dismissed because of some physical blemish
35. Fornication
1. On the right of husband and wife
2. That a husabnd cannot dismiss a fornicating wife, unless he is innocent of the same offence, and vice versa
3. On the reconciliation of those who are separated because of fornication
4. Of those who, before their joining, polluted themselves by adultery
36. Impediment of Slavery
1. Of slaves, whether separation can be allowed for their lowest condition
2. On the union of serfs of different lords
3. On the man who makes himself a serf in order to be separated from his wife
4. On the age of the contractants
37. Holy Orders & Uxoricide
1. In what orders marriage cannot be contracted
2. On those who kill their spouses
38. Religious Vows
1. On vows
2. On the differences of vows
3. Of those who return after a long captivity
39. Mixed Marriages
1. On the disparity of religion
2. On the marriage of a believer and unbeliever, or of two unbelievers
3. Of spiritual fornication, by reason of which a spouse can be dismissed
4. For what sins dismissal is or is not possible
5. When it is lawful of unlawful for a believer to take another wife
6. Whether there is marriage between unbelievers
7. That their marriage is lawful
40. Consanguinity
1. On the carnal relationship
2. On the computation of the degrees of consanguinity
3. Why six degrees are counted
4. On Gregory’s dispensation as to the English
41. Affinity
1. On the degrees of affinity
2. On the various traditions as to affinity
3. Whether there is a marriage between those who are separated when their consanguinity has become known
4. With the testimony of what persons are marriages to be dissolved
5. What is fornication
6. What is defilement
7. What is adultery
8. What is incest
9. What is abduction
42. Spiritual Relationship
1. On spiritual relationship
2. Who are spiritual children
3. On the union of spiritual or adoptive and natural children
4. On the union of children born before or after godfatherhood
5. Whether one may marry a goddaughter and a godmother, one after the other
6. Whether husband and wife may jointly sponser a child
7. On second, third and further marriages
43. Resurrection of the Body
1. On the [General] Resurrection and the condition of the [Last] Judgment
2. On the sound of the trumpet
3. On the middle of the night
4. About the books which shall then be opened
5. On the memory of the elect, whether it retains at that time the evils which have gone before
6. On those who will be found alive
7. How Christ is understood to be judge of the living and the dead
44. Those who will Rise
1. On the age and size of those who rise again
2. That whatever was of the substance and nature of the body will rise again, even if not in the same part of the body
3. That the saints will rise without any deformity
4. Whether the bodies of the reprobates rise with all the deformities which they had here
5. That the bodies of the reprobate, which will then burn, will not be consumed
6. Whether demons are burned by a corporeal fire
7. Whether souls without bodies feel the corporeal fire
8. On aborted foetuses and monsters
45. Before the General Judgment
1. Of the different places for the reception of souls
2. On suffrages for the dead
3. On the offices of burial
4. Of two who are equally good, of whom the one has many aids after death
5. By what suffrages will be aided those found [alive] at the end
6. How the glorified saints and the angels hear the prayers of suppliants and intercede for them
46. Divine Justice & Mercy
1. Whether mitigation of punishment is granted to the very evil
2. On the hidden judgment of God
3. On God’s justice and mercy
4. Why some works are attributed to [God’s] justice, others to God’s mercy and goodness
5. How all the ways of the Lord are called mercy and truth
47. General Judgment
1. On the sentences of judgment
2. That the saints shall judge, and in what manner
3. On the orders of those who shall be judged
4. On the order of the judgment and the ministry of the angels
5. Whether after judgment demons shall be set over men for their punishment
48. Second Coming
1. On the form of the Judge
2. How the form of the servant will appear at that time
3. Why it is said of Christ that He will raise bodies according to the form of a servant
4. On the place of the Judgment
5. On the quality of the heavenly lights and of time after the judgment
49. Rewards of the Blessed
1. On the distinction of mansions in heaven and in hell
2. Whether anything is there known by someone which all do not understand
3. On the parity of joy [in Heaven]
4. Whether the blessedness of the saints is greater after the Judgment
50. Separated Souls & the Damned
1. Whether the wicked shall sin in Hell
2. Why the darkness is called “outer”
3. On whether the souls of the damned have knowledge of the things that are done here
4. On Lazarus and the rich man
5. Whether the good and the wicked see each other
6. On the chasm between the good and the wicked
7. Whether the sight of the pain of the impious diminishes or increases the glory of the good
.
.
Commentaries on Lombard’s Sentences in English
Order
Bonaventure
Aquinas
Scotus
Durandus
Kilvington
Gracilis
Carlens
Mastrius
.
1200’s
Bonaventure – Commentary on the Four Books of Sentences Outline Books 1 & 4 have been translated into English at Franciscan Institute Publications.
Bonaventure (1221–1274) was an Italian Franciscan bishop, cardinal, scholastic theologian and philosopher.
Aquinas, Thomas – Commentary on the Sentences of Lombard
Aquinas (c. 1225–1274) was an Italian Dominican friar and priest, an influential philosopher and theologian, and a jurist in the tradition of scholasticism.
.
1300’s
Scotus, John Duns d. 1308
Ordinatio
Prologue
pt. 1, ‘On the necessity of revealed doctrine’
pt. 2, ‘On the sufficiency of sacred Scripture’
Scotus (c. 1265/66 – 1308) was a Scottish priest and Franciscan friar, university professor, philosopher and theologian. He is one of the four most important Christian philosopher-theologians of Western Europe in the High Middle Ages, together with Thomas Aquinas, Bonaventure and William of Ockham.
bk. 1
Distinction 2
Question 2b, ‘Proof for God: that some efficient cause is first, which is not an effect’
Wikipedia: “Briefly, Scotus begins his proof by explaining that there are two angles we must take in arguing for the existence of an actually infinite being. First from the view of the Relative Properties of God and second from the Absolute Properties of God. Relative properties are those which are predicable of God in relation to creation; absolute properties are those which belong to God whether or not He chose to create. Under the first heading of Relative Properties, Scotus argues for a triple primacy of efficiency, finality and pre-eminence. From there he shows that one primacy implies the others, and finally there can only be one nature that is the First Efficient Cause, Ultimate End, and the Most Perfect Nature. From there the Subtle Doctor discusses the Absolute Properties of God. The First Being is intellectual and volitional, and the intellect and will are identical with the essence of this supreme nature. The First Being is also infinite being. While discussing the infinity of God, Scotus resurrects Anselm’s argument and responds to the criticism that Anselm makes an illicit leap from concept to reality. Finally, he gives a definite answer of “yes” to the question of whether there exists an actually infinite being. The very next question of the Ordinatio deals with the unicity of the nature thus proved to exist. However, the De Primo Principio version concludes with this argument.
The proof for the conclusion that “some efficient cause is simply first such that neither can it be an effect nor can it, by virtue of something other than itself, cause an effect” Ordinatio I.2.43[41] runs like this:
1. Something can be produced.
2. It is produced either by itself, nothing, or another.
3. Not by nothing, for nothing causes nothing.
4. Not by itself, for an effect never causes itself.
5. Therefore, by another; call it A.
6. If A is first, then we have reached the conclusion.
7. If A is not first, but also an effect, we return to 2). A is produced either by itself, nothing, or another.
8. From 3) and 4), we say another, B. The ascending series will either continue infinitely or we finally reach something which has nothing prior to it.
9. An infinite ascending series is impossible.
10. Therefore, etc.
Scotus acknowledges two objections and deals with them accordingly. First is that he begs the question in assuming a first in the series. Here he argues that while many admit an infinite regress in an accidentally ordered series of causes, no philosopher admits infinite regress in an essentially ordered series. Scotus explains the differences between the two and offers proofs for the conclusion that an infinity of essentially ordered causes in a series is impossible.[42] Second, it is objected that his proof is not really a demonstration since it begins with a contingent premise. That something is produced is contingent and not necessary. Therefore, the proof proceeds from a contingent and not a necessary premise. Scotus says that while that is true, it is utterly manifest that things are produced or effected. But in order to respond, Scotus makes a modal move and reworks the argument. Now he argues from the possibility of production. “It is possible that something can be produced” is a necessary proposition. From there he is able to conclude that it is possible that the first efficient cause exists, and if it is possible that it exists, then it does exist. He asserts that the last claim will be proved later in the argument.[43] In the Lectura proof, Scotus argues the following way:
Although beings different from God are actually contingent with respect to their factual existence, nevertheless, they are not with respect to their possible existence. Hence, those entities which are called contingent with respect to their factual existence are necessary with respect to their possible existence – for instance, although “There exists a man” is contingent, nevertheless “It is possible that he exists” is necessary, because his existence does not include any contradiction. Therefore, “Something – different from God – is possible” is necessary, because being is divided into the contingent and the necessary. Just as necessity belongs to a necessary being in virtue of its condition or its quiddity, so possibility belongs to a possible being in virtue of its quiddity. If the first argument is alternatively qualified with the notion of ontological possibility, then we have necessary propositions as follows: It is possible that there is something different from God – it is not of itself (because then it would not be the case that it were possible), nor from nothing. Therefore, it is possible that it is from something else. Either it is possible that the other agent acts by virtue of itself – and not by virtue of something else, not being from something else – or it is not possible. If so, then it is possible that there is a first agent, and if it [is] possible that it exists, then it exists, just as we have proved before. If not and if there is no infinite regress, then the argument at once comes to a standstill.”
.
bk. 2
Distinction 3
1. Whether a material substance is individual by its very nature
2. Whether a material substance is individual through some positive intrinsic feature
3. Whether a material substance is individual through its very existence
4. Whether a material substance is individual through quantity
5-6. Whether a material substance is individual through matter, or through some beingness per se determining the nature to singularity
.
Durandus of St. Pourcain – distinction 24, question 5, ‘On the Equality of Presbyter and Bishop’ tr. by AI by WesternCatholike 4 pp. in Four Books of Commentaries on the Theological Sentences of Peter Lombard, bk. 4
Durandus (c. 1275 – 1332 / 1334) was a French Dominican, philosopher, theologian, and bishop.
Richard of Kilvington
Utrum omnis creatura sit suae naturae certis limitibus circumscripta [Whether every creature may be of its own nature circumscribed by certain limits] in Monika Michałowska, Richard Kilvington on the Capacity of Created Beings, Infinity & Being Simultaneously in Rome and Paris: Critical Edition of Question 3 from Quaestiones super libros Sententiarum in Studien und Texte zur Geistesgeschichte des Mittelalters 130 (Brill, 2021), pp. 77–181
Richard (c. 1302-1361) was an English scholastic theologian and philosopher at the University of Oxford. His surviving works are lecture notes from the 1320s and 1330s. He was involved in a controversy over the nature of the infinite, with Richard FitzRalph.
Kilvington’s lecture notes on the Sentences only contain eight questions on bk. 1. Here are questions 3-4 in English.
Utrum quilibet actus volutatis per se malus sit per se aliquid [Whether any act of the will in itself evil may be in itself something] in eds. Elżbieta Jung & Monika Michałowska, Richard Kilvington Talks to Thomas Bradwardine about Future Contingents, Free Will, and Predestination: A Critical Edition of Question 4 from “Quaestiones super libros Sententiarum” in Studien und Texte zur Geistesgeschichte des Mittelalters 134 Pre (Brill, 2022)
Gracilis, Peter – bk 1, q. 32, ‘Whether to one existing in charity or predestined eternally God is able to reveal their damnation with certainty?’ in Commentary on the Books of the Sentences (1378-1379)
Gracilis (fl. 1378-1379)
.
1400’s
Antonius of Carlens – Questions on the Four Books of the Sentences, Prologue in Steven J. Livesey, Antonius de Carlenis, O.P.: Four Questions on the Subalternation of the Sciences in Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, vol. 84, pt. 4 (1994)
q. 1, ‘Whether Theology is a Science’
q. 2, ‘Whether Theology is a Subalternate or Subalternating Science’
Carlens of Neapoli was one of Paul of Venice’s readers shortly before the mid-15th century and the archbishop of Amalfi.
.
1600’s
Mastrius, Bartolomeo – Disputation 1 tr. by AI by OmegaPoint99 225 pp. of bk. 3, Of the Incarnation of the Lord (d. 1673)
Mastrius (1602–1673) was an Italian Conventual Franciscan philosopher and theologian. He was deeply versed in the writings of Duns Scotus, and defended his teachings.
quest. 1, ‘Whether the incarnation of the divine Word was possible’ 1
art. 1, The possibility is shown on the part of the assuming Word 2
art. 2, The possibility is shown form the nature assumed 11
art. 3, The possibility of the incarnation is shown from the perspective of the hypostatic union 18
quest. 2, ‘On the nature of the hypostatic union’ 24
art. 1, Where some difficulties concerning this union are examined 27
art. 2, Other difficulties resolved 35
quest. 3, ‘On subsistence. Whether subsistence as something positive added to nature implies something positive or negative, and what that is’ 42
art. 1, The opinion about the negative is against established 43
art. 2, Objections are solved, and Gavatius’s replies in favor of the positive opinion
art. 3, What they adduce from councils and fathers for the view about the positive is examined by Arriaga, Amicus and others
art. 4, The doubt is resolved, whether a created suppositum can sustain an alien nature 83
art. 5, The doubt is resolved, whether if the same divine person were to assum several humanities, it would be called on or several men 95
quest. 4, ‘Whether in fact the Word immediately assumed the essential parts of human nature’ 103
art. 1, What must be said about the essential parts 104
art. 2, An incidental doubt, whether the unitive action of humanity is also productive of it, where its term is discussed 112
quest. 5, ‘Whether the word immediately assumed all the integral parts of the human body, even the blood and other humors’ 119
art. 1, Resolution of the question 120
art. 2, Objections are solved 131
quest. 6, ‘Whether the human nature in Christ has its own existence, or rather exists by the existence of the Word’
art. 1, Resolution of the question 141
art. 2, The foundations of the opposing opinion are overthrown 152
quest. 7, ‘Whether any nature could be immediately assumed by the Word’
art. 1, What is to be said about irrational or insensible nature 158
art. 2, What should be said about accidental form 171
quest. 8, ‘Whether multiple persons can simultaneously assume the same numerical nature, or one person multiple natures’ 179
art. 1, One person can assume multiple natures, but multiple persons cannot assume the same nature 179
art. 2, Other arguments of the Doctor are put forth for the same conclusion 192
art. 3, The foundations of the opposing opinion are destroyed 200
quest. 9, ‘Whether the divine nature could have immediately assumed humanity’ 207
art. 1, In what sense an absolute subsistence of the divine essence besides the three relative personal ones should be granted in divine things 209
art. 2, In what sense it must be conceded that the divine nature could immediately assume humanity 219-25
.
Commentaries on Lombard’s Sentences in Latin
Order
Bandinus
Hales
Bonaventure
Aquinas
Tarantasia
Rothwell
Kilwardby
Albert
Olivi
Middleton
Scotus
Sutton
Giles
Andreas
Aureoli
Natalis
Ancona
Meyronnes
Crathorn
Durandus
Rubio
Roseth
Siena
Palude
Chatton
Mirecourt
Ockham
Bassolis
Holcot
Buckingham
Strasbourg
Wodeham
Rimini
FitzRalph
Kilvington
Aquila
Ast
Ripa
Altavilla
Montina
Orvieto
Oyta
Klenkok
Gracilis
Brammart
Hiltalingen
Inghen
Novo Castro
Seehusen
Candia
Boltenhagen
Plaoul
Hus
Ailly
Dinkelsbuhl
Stetzing
Capreolus
Halberstadt
Oswald
Vorillon
Capestrano
Werl
Wesel
Biel
Monte
Mair
Lychetus
Adriaan
Cortese
Viterbo
Eck
De Soto
Angles
Estius
Herrera
Mastrius
Brancati
.
Bibliographies
Stegmüller, F. – Repertorium Commentariorum in Sententias Petri Lombardi Ref (Würzburg 1947)
Doucet, Victorin – Commentaires sur les Sentences: supplément au répertoire de M. F. Stegmüller Ref (Florence: Collegii S. Bonaventurae, 1954) 128 pp.
L. A. K. – A Catalogue of Thomists (n.d.) 200 pp.
While this is a classified bibliography by century of over 2,000 Thomists from the 1200’s to the 1800’s, yet it includes where the authors have written Sentence commentaries.
.
Online
Digital Repertory of Commentaries on Peter Lombard’s Sentences
Click on “Choose Index” and then a selection (such as time “Periods”) to begin browsing the collection of Lombard commentaries. Most of the collection is references to texts, manuscripts (and where located), bibliographic data and secondary scholarship on the authors. For this the site is very good. A small minority of the volumes are currently available online.
“We are currently dealing with 1742 possible commentaries conceived by possibly 580 identified and 514 anonymous authors.”
1200’s
Bandinus – Commentary on Peter Lombard’s Sentences (Manuscript) Info
Bandinus lived in the 1100’s.
“Several before him [Lombard] had written systems of doctrine under that title [of “Sentences”], as we have seen. There has been preserved a work of this kind by an unknown Bandinus, which so closely resembles the Lombard’s work that some kind of dependence seems probable.” C.A. Briggs, History of the Study of Theology (1916) 2.33-34
Alexander of Hales – A Sum of Universal Theology in Four Parts, vol. 1 (God), 2 (Creation), 3 (Christ & Virtues), 4 (Sacraments) (Venice: 1575-1576) 302 pp. ToC 1, 2, 3, 4 Indices: Common Places, Subject, Authors, Aristotle’s Theorems, Scripture Errata In this edition, vols. 1 & 3 are bound together. This is not strictly a commentary on Lombard, but it follows roughly the same topical order.
Alexander (c. 1185–1245) also called Doctor Irrefragibilis (by Pope Alexander IV in the Bull De Fontibus Paradisi) and the King of Theologians (Theologorum monarcha), was a Franciscan friar, theologian and philosopher important in the development of scholasticism.
This was the first major commentary on the Sentences. On the commentary, see ‘Alexander of Hales: Summa Universae Theologiae‘ at Wikipedia.
Bonaventure – Commentary on the Four Books of the Sentences of Master Peter Lombard, vol. 1 (God), 2 (Creation), 3 (Christ & Virtues), 4 (Sacraments) in All the Works (Florence: College of St. Bonaventura, 1882), vols. 1-4 ToC 1, 2, 3, 4 HTML
Bonaventure (1221–1274) was an Italian Franciscan bishop, cardinal, scholastic theologian and philosopher.
Thomas Aquinas – Commentary on the Sentences This is searchable by pressing ‘control-f’.
Aquinas (c. 1225–1274) was an Italian Dominican friar and priest, an influential philosopher and theologian, and a jurist in the tradition of scholasticism.
Petrus of Tarantasia – A Commentary on the Four Books of the Sentences, vol. 1 (God), 2 (Creation), 3 (Christ & Virtues), 4 (Sacraments) (Toulouse: Gregg Press, 1652) ToC 1, 2, 3, 4 Indices: Subject, Scripture
Petrus (c. 1225 – 1276), or Pope Innocent V, was at one time a member of the Order of Preachers. He held one of the two “Dominican Chairs” at the University of Paris. In 1269, he was a Provincial of the French Province of Dominicans. He was a close collaborator of Pope Gregory X, who named him Bishop of Ostia and raised him to cardinal in 1273.
William of Rothwell – Abbreviation of Peter of Tarentaise’s Commentary on Peter Lombard’s Sententiarum (1270-1280) ToC Selections
Rothwell (fl. 1270-1280). See Kent Emery Jr., ‘The ‘Sentences’ Abbreviation of William de Rothwell, O.P.’ in Recherches de théologie ancienne et médiévale, vol. 51 (Jan.-Dec. 1984), pp. 69-135.
Robert Kilwardby – Sentences Commentary ToC
Kilwardby (c. 1215 – 1279) was an Archbishop of Canterbury in England and a cardinal. Kilwardby was the first member of a mendicant order to attain a high ecclesiastical office in the English Church.
Albert the Great – Commentaries on the Books of Sentences of Peter Lombard, vol. 1 (God), 2 (Creation, Christ & Virtues), 3 (Sacraments) in Works (Leiden, 1651), vols. 14-16 ToC 1, 2, 3, 4
Albert (c. 1200 –1280) was a German Dominican friar, philosopher, scientist, and bishop, considered one of the greatest medieval philosophers and thinkers.
Olivi, Peter Jean
Questions on Knowing God an appendix in Quaestiones in secundum librum Sententiarum (Quaracchi: Collegium S. Bonaventurae, 1922-1926), vol. 3, pp. 453–554
Olivi (1248–1298) was a French Franciscan theologian and philosopher who was a controversial figure in the arguments surrounding poverty at the beginning of the 14th century. His support of the rigorous view of ecclesiastical poverty played a part in the ideology of the groups coming to be known as the Spiritual Franciscans or Fraticelli.
“Olivi commented on the Lombard’s Sentences—much of Book III and IV, and all of Book II in which he demonstrated himself to be an unsurpassed proponent of human free will. He was also a prominent critic of Averroes.
His indirect, fragmentary commentary on Lombard Book I, De Deo Cognoscendo, is published as an appendix to the commentary on the Lombard’s Sentences Book II (pp. 525–554). His argument there carries Anselm’s ontological argument to its fullness by affirming the superlative perfection (summe infinitum) of all of God’s attributes in a way analogous to, and reflective of, Olivi’s “superabundant hermeneutics” of the Apocalypse…” – Wikipedia
Questions on the Second Book of the Sentences, vol. 1 (q. 1-48), 2 (49-71), 3 (72-118) (Quaracchi: Collegium S. Bonaventurae, 1922-1926)
eds. Aquilino Emmen & Ernst Stadter – Quaestiones de incarnatione et redemptione. Quaestiones de virtutibus Ref (Grottaferrata: Collegium San Bonaventurae, 1981)
ed. Pietro Maranesi,Quaestiones de novissimis ex Summa super IV Sententiarum Ref (Grottaferrata: Editiones Collegii S. Bonaventurae, 2004) 213 pp.
.
1300’s
Richard of Middleton – Questions on the Four Books of Sentences of Peter Lombard, vol. 1 (God), 2 (Creation), 3 (Christ & Virtues), 4 (Sacraments) (Brixiae, 1591) ToC 1, 2, 3, 4 Index
Richard (c. 1249 – c. 1308) was a member of the Franciscan Order, a theologian, and scholastic philosopher.
Scotus, John Duns
Reportatio of Paris, vol. 1 (1 – 2.11), 2 (2.12 – 3.35, 4.1-6), 3 (4.7-49) in All the Works, new ed. Paris, 1891, vols. 22-24 ToC 1, 2, 3
Scotus (c. 1265/66 – 1308) was a Scottish priest and Franciscan friar, university professor, philosopher and theologian. He is one of the four most important Christian philosopher-theologians of Western Europe in the High Middle Ages, together with Thomas Aquinas, Bonaventure and William of Ockham, and has been known as Doctor Subtilis. Little is known of Duns Scotus apart from his work. He began lecturing on Peter Lombard’s Sentences at the prestigious University of Paris in the late 1290’s.
The Reportatio is a “report” of a student who transcribed Scotus’s lectures on the Sentences.
The Examined Report of the Paris Lecture, Reportatio I-A, 2 vols. eds. Allan B. Wolter & Oleg Bychkov (Franciscan Institute Publications, 2004, 2008)
An “examined” report is one that was checked by the lecturer (Scotus).
Lectures on the Sentences
Opera Omnia (Vatican Edition = VE; Civitas Vaticana: Typis Polyglottis Vaticanis)
16. Lectura in Librum Primum Sententiarum. Prologus et Distinctiones 1–7 (late 1290’s; 1960)
17. Lectura in Librum Primum Sententiarum. Distinctiones 8–45 (1966)
18. Lectura in Librum Secundum Sententiarum. Distinctiones 1–6 (1982)
19. Lectura in Librum Secundum Sententiarum. Distinctiones 7–44 (1993)
20. Lectura in Librum Tertium Sententiarum. Distinctiones 1–17 (2003)
21. Lectura in Librum Tertium Sententiarum. Distinctiones 18–40 (2004)
Lectures on bk. 4 are not existant.
These appear to be Scotus’s notes for his lectures on the Sentences.
The Ordinatio: Oxford Commentary on the Four Books of the Master of the Sentences, vol. 1 (God), 2 (Creation), 3.1 (Christ to dist. 22), 3.2 (dist. 23-40), 4.1 (Sacraments to dist. 7), 4.2 (8-13), 4.3 (14-22), 4.4 (23-42), 4.5 (43-48), 4.6 (49-50) (vols. 1-2: Quaracchi: College of St. Bonaventure, 1912; bks. 3-4: in All the Works, new ed. Paris, 1891, vols. 14-21) ToC 1, 2, 3.1, 3.2, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6
“Scotus’s great work is his commentary on the Sentences of Peter Lombard, which contains nearly all the philosophical views and arguments for which he is well known, including the univocity of being, the formal distinction, less than numerical unity, individual nature or “thisness” (haecceity), his critique of illuminationism and his renowned argument for the existence of God…
the Ordinatio (also known as the Opus oxoniense) [was] a revised version of lectures he gave as a bachelor at Oxford. The initial revision was probably begun in the summer of 1300… It was still incomplete when Scotus left for Paris in 1302…
By the time of Scotus, these ‘commentaries’ on the Sentences were no longer literal commentaries. Instead, Peter Lombard’s original text was used as a starting point for highly original discussions on topics of theological or philosophical interest. For example, Book II Distinction 2, about the location of angels, is a starting point for a complex discussion about continuous motion, and whether the same thing can be in two different places at the same time (bilocation). In the same book, Distinction 3, he uses the question of how angels can be different from one another, given that they have no material bodies, to investigate the difficult question of individuation in general.” – Wikipedia
.
ToC
Bk. 1
Judgment of Luke Wadding 1
Preface of Cavell 3
Prologue of Lombard 7
Preface of Scotus 8
Prologue
1. Whether for man for this state any supernaturally revealed, special doctrine, which the intellect is not able to attain by natural light, may be necessary 9
2. Whether the supernatural knowledge necessary for the wayfarer (person in this life) may be sufficiently given in the sacred Scripture 74
3. Whether theology may be of God as of the first subject 119
1. Whether theology may be of God under a special reason 120
2. Whether this science may be of all things from the attribution of them to its first subject 122
3. Whether theology in itself may be a science, and whether it may be a science subalternating or subalternated 183
4. Whether theology may be practical 195
1st Distinction
1. Whether through Himself the object of fruition may be the ultimate end 298
2. Whether the ultimate end may have only one rule of being able to enjoy; whether in itself there may be some distinction, according to which the will is able to enjoy it according to one rule and not another 314
3. Whether fruition may be an elicited act from the will, or the loving of it 343
4. Whether without a necessary apprehension through the intellect the will may enjoy it 352
5. Whether it may be convenient for God to enjoy? or whether God, a wayfarer, a sinner, an animal or all things are enjoyed 378
2nd Distinction
1. Whether in beings may be some infinite act existing 393
2. Whether something infinite, or God existing, may be known through itself 395
3. Whether there may be only one God 487
4. Whether with the unity of essence there may stand a plurality of Persons 503
5. Whether in God there may be three persons, not more nor less 506
6. Whether the divine essence is able to stand in another being produced 506
7. Whether in God there may be two productions, not more 507
Bk. 1
3rd Distinction
1. Whether God is naturally knowable by a wayfarer (person in this life) 1
2. Whether God is naturally the first thing known for this state 8
3. Whether God is an adequate natural object for the intellect of the wayfarer 8
4. Whether some certain and sound truth is able to be known naturally by the wayfarer’s intellect without a special illumination of uncreated light 162
5. Whether a vestige of the Trinity may be in all creatures 207
6. Whether in the intellective part may be the memory properly taken, that is, the intellect having the prior intelligible species naturally by the act of understanding 232
7. Whether the intellective part or anything of it may be the begetting cause or the rule of begetting an actual notion 335
8. Whether the principal cause of a notion is the object in itself, or in the species, or the intellect itself 398
9. Whether the image of the Trinity may be in the mind 403
4th Distinction
1. Whether this may be true: God has begotten another God 418
2. Whether this may be true: God is the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit 429
5th Distinction
1. Whether the divine essence may generate or be generated 441
2. Whether the Son may be generated of the substance of the Father 464
6. Whether God the Father may have generated the Son of God by the will 507
7th Distinction
Whether the power to generate may be something absolute (common to God), or a property of the Father 524
8th Distinction
1. Whether God may be most simple 559
2. Whether any creature is simple 564
3. Whether God is of a genus 580
4. Whether is given in God the distinction of essential perfections, in which way the intellect precedes any act 636
5. Whether God alone may be immutable 735
9. Whether the generation of the Son in the divinity may be eternal 773
10. Whether the Holy Spirit may be produced through the mode of the will 787
11th Distinction
1. Whether the Holy Spirit may proceed from the Father and the Son 824
2. If the Holy Spirit does not proceed from the Son, whether the real distinction of Him from the Son may be able to stand 835
12th Distinction
1. Whether the Father and the Son may spirate the Holy Spirit as one principle, or by some distinct mode 852
2. Whether the Father and the Son may uniformly spirate the Holy Spirit 871
13. Whether the Holy Spirit may be begotten 884-913
Bk. 1
14th Distinction, Lombard’s text 1
15. Whether any divine Person may send and be sent 5
16. Whether a visible mission may be convenient to the Holy Spirit 16
17th Distinction
1. Whether it may be necessary to posit a created charity formally inhering in a nature able to be beatified 39
2. Whether the habit may be the active principle with respect to an act 41
3. Whether a moral habit as a virtue may be an active principle by another way in an act of goodness 54
4. Whether the entire preexisting charity may be destroyed when a new thing is induced, so that no reality may abide by the same number in charity more or less 101
5. Whether that preexisting positive thing of charity which may remain in enlargement may be the whole essence of charity in extension 114
6. Whether charity may be enlarged, concerning the power to act, through the extraction of a new part 122
18. Whether “gift” may be called the personal property of the Holy Spirit 141
19th Distinction
1. Whether the Persons are equal according to magnitude 160
2. Whether any divine Person may be in another 183
20. Whether the three Persons are equal in power 198
21. Whether this may be true: The Father alone is God 210
22nd Distinction
1. Whether God may be nameable by any name signifying an essence, and so “this” (haec) 221
2. Whether God may be nameable by any creature 227
23. (?) Whether a Person, according to something said, common to the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, may be precisely called something according to the intention 257
24. Whether there may properly be number in the divinity (in divinis) 268
25. Whether a person in the divinity may be called a substances or a relation 278
26. Whether divine Persons may be constituted in personal being through a relation of origin or through something absolute 291
27th Distinction
1. Whether the Word may have created an actual intellect 359
2. Whether the Word in divinity may be called a personally begotten individual 359
3. Whether the divine Word may be said in repect to a creature 360
28th Distinction
1. Whether unbegottenness may be a property of the Father himself 392
2. Whether innascibility may be a constitutive property of the First Person in the divinity 393
3. Whether the First Person may be constituted in personal being by some positive relation unto the Second Person 408
29. Whether “the originating principle” (principium) in one way may be said of the originating principle taken personally and notionally, and also taken essentially 441
30th Distinction
1. Whether some relation from time may be said of God 446
2. Whether there is able to be some real relation of God to the creature 446
31. Whether identity, similitude and equality are real relations in God 489
32nd Distinction
1. Whether the Father and the Son may love each other by the Holy Spirit 500
2. Whether the Father may be knowing (sapiens) by knowledge (sapientia) being begotten 505
33rd Distinction, Lombard’s text 521
34. Whether a Person may be the same with the essence 534
35. Whether in God are eternal relations for all knowlable things, and so cognitions of whatness 536
36. Whether the creature so far is a foundation of the eternal relation to God, and so knowing, it may truly have the being of essence, and that this is under such a respect 564
37. Whether God being present everywhere according to power, one may infer Him to be everywhere according to essence, that is, whether omnipotence may infer immensity 595
38. Whether the knowledge (scientia) of God in respect of creatable things may be practical 603
39. Whether God may have determinate knowledge of all things, reaching unto all conditions of existence 612
40. Whether one predestined is able to be damned 679
41. Whether there may be any merit of predestination or reprobation 690
42. Whether that God be omnipotent is able to be proved by natural reason 714
43. Whether the first rule of the impossibility of a thing to be done may be on the part of God or on the part of the doable thing 728
44. Whether God is able to do another thing than what He ordained from Himself to be done 744
45. Whether from eternity God willed other things from Himself 756
46. Whether God’s will of good-pleasure may always be fulfilled 768
47. Whether divine permission may be some act of the divine will 773
48. Whether the human will may be morally good whenever it may be conformed to the divine will 779
Bk. 2
Distinction 1
1. Whether the first causality in respect of all causable things of necessity may be in the three Persons 2
2. Whether God may be able to create something 48
3. Whether it is possible for God to produce some other thing from Himself without a principle of duration [pp. 65-80 are missing]
4. Whether the creation of an angel may be in an angel 94
5. Whether an angel and soul differ by species 185
Distinction 2
1. Whether in the actual existence of an angel there may be any formal succession 212
2. Whether in an angel actually existing, it may be necessary to posit something measuring the existence of it, or the duration of its existence, another thing really existing from itself 246
3. Whether of all eternities (aeviternorum) there may be one eternity (aevum) 279
4. Whether the operation of an angel may be measured by eternity 284
5. Whether an angel may be in a place 324
6. Whether the place of an angel may be determined by points, more and less 325
7. Whether one angel is able to simultaneously be in many places 369
8. Whether two angels may simultaneously be in the same place 376
9. Whether Angels may be able to move from place to place by a continuous motion 379
10. Whether an angel may be able to move itself 523
11. Whether an angel may be able to move in an instant 546
12. Whether an angel may be able to move from one end-point to another without travelling through the middle 562-69
Bk. 2
3rd Distinction
Lombard 1
1. Whether material substance, from itself or from its nature, may be individual or singular 6
2. Whether material substance by another positive, intrinsic thing may be individual of itself 77
3. Whether material substance through actual existence may be individual, or the rule of individuating some other thing 86
4. Whether material substance may be individual or singular through quantity 91
5. Whether material substance may be this (haec), and individual through matter 123
6. Whether material substance may be individual through some positive being determining the nature through itself unto singularity 127
7. Whether many angels may be able to be in the same species 159
8. Whether an angel may be able itself to know through its essence 179
9. Whether an angel may have a distinct natural knowledge of the divine essence 201
10. Whether, as an angel may know other created whatnesses (different) from itself, it may require by necessity that it may have distinct, particular rules of knowing them 233
11. Whether angels may be able to progress in receiving knowledge from things 270
4. Whether between the creation and blessedness of a good angel there was some delay 294
5th Distinction
1. Whether the first angel merited blessedness rather than having received it 297
2. Whether the good angels were blessed in their first instant of creation and the bad angels wretched 313
6th Distinction
1. Whether a bad angel was able to seek equality with God 333
2. Whether the first sin of an angel was formally pride 344
7. Whether a bad angel may will evil by necessity 372
8. Whether an angel is able to assume a body in which he may exercise the operation of life 417
9th Distinction
1. Whether a superior angel may be able to illumine an inferior one 427
2. Whether one angel may be able to intellectually speak to another 427
10. Whether the angels are sent 522
11. Whether a guardian angel may be able to effectively cause something in the intellect of a man under care 528
12th Distinction
1. Whether in general and corruptible substance there may be some positive entity really distinct from a form 546
2. Whether through some power matter may be able to be without form 574
13. Whether light may beget light as a proper, sensible species of it 611
14th Distinction
1. Whether a heavenly body may be a simple essence 641
2. Whether something may be a mobile heaven, another from the starry heaven 648
3. Whether the heavens may direct these lower parts 660
Bk. 2
15th Distinction
Lombard 1
Whether in an animal body or in whatever mix, elements remain according to the substance in act 4
16. Whether the image of the Trinity may consist in three powers of the rational soul really distinct 23
17th Distinction
1. Whether Adam’s soul was created in the body 64
2. Whether paradise may be a convenient place for human habitation 70
18. Whether in matter may be a seminal rule [ratio] unto the form to be brought out naturally of itself 84
19. Whether in the state of innocence we may have truly had such bodies 102
20th Distinction
1. Whether children born in the state of innocence would have immediately been confirmed in righteousness 115
2. Whether in the state of innocence there would have been only those born which now may be elect 120
3. Whether children in the state of innocence would have had perceived in body and knowledge (scientia) in a like way 125
21. Whether the sin of the first man in the state of innocence was capable of being venial 132
22. Whether the sin of the first man was from ignorance 151
23. Whether God is able to make the will of the rational creature impeccable by nature 159
24. Whether a superior portion may be a distinct power from an inferior portion 177
25. Whether something other from the will may effectively cause the act of willing in the will 197
26. Whether grace may be in the essence of the soul or in the power 234
27. Whether grace may be a virtue 247
28. Whether the free choice of man without grace may have been able to avoid mortal sin 254
29. Whether it may be necessary to posit original righteousness in Adam by some gift being supernatural 267
30th Distinction
1. Whether anyone may contract original sin by a common law propagated from Adam 292
2. Whether this sin may be destitute of original righteousness 293
31. Whether the soul may contract original sin from infected flesh concupiscibly sown 298
32. Whether in baptism original sin may be remitted 305
33. Whether original sin may be liable to only the pain of damnation 328
34. Whether sin may be from a good as from a cause 335
35. Whether sin may be of itself a privation of good 341
36. Whether sin may be the punishment of sin 347
37th Distinction
1. Whether sin may be able to be from God 351
2. Whether a created will may be a whole cause and immediately will of itself, so that God in respect of it may not have any immediate efficacy, but mediate 368
38. Whether an intention may be an act of the will only 398
39th Distinction
1. Whether synderesis may be in the will 409
2. Whether conscience may be in the will 410
40. Whether every act may be good from the end of it 424
41. Whether any act may be able to be indifferent 434
42nd Distinction
1. Whether sin may be able to be in thinking 446
2. Whether sin may be able to be in speech 447
3. Whether sin may be able to consist in a work 447
4. Whether the division of Dr. Jerome on sin may be sufficient 448
5. Of the division of capital sins 478
43rd Distinction
1. Whether the will may be able to sin against the Holy Spirit 482
2. Whether the created will may be able to sin out of malice, willing something not known to oneself under the rule of true good, that is, of good simply, or of good apparent, and according to what 490
44. Whether the power to sin may be from God 496
.
Bk. 3
1st Distinction
Lombard 2
1. Whether it was possible for a human nature to be united to the Word in the unity of a suppositum 4
2. Whether three persons may be able to assume the same numeric nature 58
3. Whether one person may be able to assume many natures 79
4. Whether a created suppositum may be able to sustain hypostatically another created nature 83
5. Whether the formal rule to terminate this union may be a relative property 95
2nd Distinction
1. Whether the human nature united to God hypostatically, not however for enjoying, may involve a contradiction 106
2. Whether the Word first and immediately may have assumed a whole human nature 126
3. Whether the incarnation may have preceded bodily organization 150
3rd Distinction
1. Whether the blessed Virgin may have been conceived in original sin 159
2. On the sanctification of Christ’s body: why and in what way He surely did not contract original sin 177
4. Whether the blessed Virgin Mary was truly the mother of God and man 182
5th Distinction
1. Whether the divine nature may have assumed, or was able to assume a human nature 208
2. Whether a created person was assumed, or was able to be assumed 210
6th Distinction
1. Whether in Christ may be some being of the Word from a being having been created 303
2. Whether Christ may be something twofold 314
3. Which of those three opinions recited by the Master ought to be held 324
7th Distinction
1. Whether this may be true: God is man 327
2. Whether this may be true: God was made man 341
3. Whether Christ was predestined to be the Son of God 348
8. Whether in Christ are two filiations 362
9. Whether Christ worship (latria) in reference to Christ ought to be only according to the divine nature 385
10. Whether Christ may be the adopted Son of God 403
11th Distinction
1. Whether Christ may be a creature 412
2. Whether Christ as a man may be a creature 426
3. Whether Christ may have been begun 432
12. Whether Christ may have been able to sin 439
13th Distinction
1. Whether to Christ the sum of grace was able to be conferred, by which He was able to confer to the creature 447
2. Whether by the fact the sum of grace was collated to the soul of Christ, conferring to the creature was possible 448
3. Whether it was possible the will of Christ’s soul had the highest fruition possible of a created nature 449
4. Whether the soul of Christ was able in the highest way to enjoy with reference to God without the sum of grace 450
14th Distinction
1. Whether it was possible the intellect of Christ’s soul was from the first and immediately perfected in the most perfect vision of the Word possible to a creature 490
2. Whether it was possible the intellect of Christ’s soul saw all things in the Word which the Word sees 491
3. Whether Christ’s soul may have known all things in a general proportion (?genera proprio) 521
4. Whether Christ’s soul may have known all things most perfectly in a general proportion 532
15. Whether in Christ’s soul according to a superior portion it was truly sorrowful 563
16th Distinction
1. Whether Christ had of necessity to die 625
2. Whether there was power in Christ’s soul not to die from violent passions 626
17. Whether in Christ there were so far two wills 652
18. Whether Christ merited in the first instance of his conception 661
19. Whether Christ merited for every one of us grace and glory, and the remission of guilt and punishment 709
20. Whether it was necessary the stock of men be repaired through the suffering of Christ 731
21. Whether Christ’s body may have had putrefied if the resurrection had not happened quickly 743
22. Whether Christ was a man for the three days 754-79
.
Bk. 3
23. Whether concerning persons being able to believe things revealed to us it may be necessary to suppose an infused faith 5
24. Whether concerning persons being able to believe revealed things, a person may be able to simultaneously have knowledge (scientiam) and faith 34
25. Whether before Christ’s advent faith was necessary concerning these things, in which way we believe 57
26. Whether hope may be a theological virtue, distinct from faith and charity 321
27. Whether some theological virtue may incline to love God above all 354
28. Whether by the same habit may be love to one’s neighbor by which God is loved 377
29. Whether one may be bound to love oneself to the highest degree after God 389
30. Whether it may be necessary from charity to love an enemy 395
31. Whether charity may abide in heaven (patria) that it be not extinguished 406
32. Whether God may love with charity all equally 426
33. Whether moral virtues may be in the will as in a subject 438
34. Whether virtues, gifts and blessedness, and fruits may be severally the same habit 464
35. Whether wisdom, knowledge (scientia), understanding and counsel may be an intellectual habit 587
36. Whether the moral virtues may be connected 595
37. Whether all the Decalog’s precepts may be of the law of nature 741
38. Whether every deception may be a sin 861
39. Whether every perjury may be a moral sin 984
40. Whether the new Law may be more grave than the old 1084
.
Bk. 4
Preface 1
1st Distinction
Preface by Scotus 8
Of a sacrament in general 12
1. Whether a creature may be able to hold any action in respect of the end of the creature 12
2. Whether this may be the definitive rule of the sacrament which the Master posits: A sacrament is a visible form of invisible grace 99
3. Whether for the time each law given by God may ought to have instituted some sacrament some sacrament 122
4. Whether it may be possible any sacrament, however so far perfect, has an active causality in respect of grace being conferred 122
5. Whether it may be possible a supernatural virtue be in a sacrament 140
6. Whether in circumcision, from its power was joined grace 195
7. Whether in the time of the natural law was some sacrament corresponding to circumcision 232
2nd Distinction
1. Whether the sacraments of the new Law may have an efficacy from Christ’s suffering 238
2. Whether one being baptized with John’s baptism by necessity ought to be baptized with Christ’s baptism 263
3rd Distinction
1. Whether that definition of baptism may be proper which the Master posits, even: Baptism is a dipping of the exterior body made under the form words prescribed 274
2. Whether this may be the precise form of baptism: I baptize you in the name of the Father, and Son, and Holy Spirit 282
3. Whether natural, pure water alone may be convenient matter for baptism 323
4. Whether the institution of baptism may have extinguished circumcision 333
4th Distinction
1. Whether little ones ought to be baptized 383
2. Whether little ones having been baptized may receive the effect of baptism 389
3. Whether a little one in the mother’s womb may be able to be baptized 405
4. Whether one not consenting may be able to receive the effect of baptism 416
5. Whether an adult having been touching may receive the effect of baptism 425
6. Whether to immediately justify may pertain to the undertaking of baptism 451
7. Whether all having been baptized may receive equally the effect of baptism 476
8. What ought to be made of a small exposition 486
9. Whether the little ones of the Jews and unbelievers with unwilling parents ought to be baptized 487
5th Distinction
1. Whether a minister’s malice may impede joining of baptism 501
2. Whether one receiving baptism knowingly from a bad minister mortally sins 507
3. Whether any ought to minister the sacrament of baptism when it is premised that the one baptized verges on being in danger (or trial) of his bodily life, which one takes 519
6th Distinction
1. Whether only priests may be able to baptize 530
2. Whether the oneness of baptism may necessarily require that it be conferred by one minister 542
3. Whether it may be required that the washing and the exhibiting of the Word be simultaneous 557
4. Whether it may be necessary for the one baptized to be personally distinct from the baptizer 560
5. Whether in the baptizer may be required the intention of baptizing 562
6. Whether in the baptizer an actual intention may be required 577
7. Whether baptism may be able to be repeated 581
8. Whether a punishment may be constituted for baptism being repeated
9. Whether in baptism a character is imprinted 590
10. Whether a character may be an absolute form 618
11. Whether a character may be in the essence of the soul as in the proximate subject 648
7th Distinction
1. What may be the sacrament of confirmation. Of the matter and form; of the undertaking and minister, and of the requisite conditions in conferring and undertaking this sacrament 657
2. Whether the sacrament of confirmation may be necessary to salvation 702
3. Whether the sacrament of confirmation may be more dignified than baptism 704
4. Whether the sacrament of confirmation may be able to be repeated 705
5.Whether there may be some punishment for repeating the sacrament of confirmation 708
.
Bk. 4
8th Distinction
1. Whether the eucharist may be a sacrament of the new Law 6
2. Whether that may be the precise form of eucharist’s consecration which is given in the canon of the mass 34
3. Whether the sacrament of the eucharist may be able to be received from those not fasting 74
9. Whether one in mortal sin may mortally sin in taking the sacrament of the eucharist 119
10th Distinction
1. Whether it may be possible Christ’s body be really contained under the species of the bread and wine 148
2. Whether the same body may be able to be simultaneously local in diverse locations 190
3. Whether Christ’s body may be able to be simultaneously in heaven and in the eucharist 222
4. Whether Christ’s body, with reference to it naturally existing and the same sacramentally existing, may be in the same parts and properties 228
5. Whether whatever emanating action which is in Christ naturally existing may be in Him sacramentally existing in the eucharist 234
6. Whether Christ’s body existing in the eucharist may be able to be in a corporal motion 262
7. Whether Christ existing in the eucharist may be able through some natural virtue to transmutate some other thing from itself 275
8. Whether any created intellect may be able to naturally see the existence of Christ’s body in the eucharist 282
9. Whether Christ’s body is so in the sacrament, it may be able to be seen by a bodily eye 295
11th Distinction
1. Whether transubstantiation may be possible 314
2. Whether it may be possible for any being to convert into anything 335
3. Whether bread may convert into Christ’s body in the eucharist 350
4. Whether bread in the conversion to Christ’s body may be annihilated 442
5. Whether the conversion of the bread to Christ’s body may be able to truly express, and by what propositions 469
6. Whether only wheat bread with water with a fermenting element may be convenient matter of conversion to Christ’s body 471
7. Whether only pressed wine of the grapevine may be convenient matter for the conversion to Christ’s blood 494
12th Distinction
1. Whether in the eucharist may be any accident without a subject 518
2. Whether whatever accident in the eucharist may remain without the subject 563
3. Whether accidents in the eucharist may be able to have whatever action that is able to hold in the subject 580
4. Whether every transmutation which is able to be caused by a created agent around accidents remaining in the eucharist, by necessity may require the same quantity to remain 614
5. Whether it may be possible for there to a corruptive transmutation of those accidents around the eucharist 633
6. Whether in any transmutation made around the eucharist it may be necessary some substance be returned by a divine action 639
13th Distinction
1. Whether by a divine action alone Christ’s body may be able to be brought about 660
2. Whether any priest proffering the word of consecration with an owed intention, around the convenient matter, may be able to bring forth the eucharist 696
2 Added Questions on Sacrifice
1. Of the essence of sacrifice in general 700
2. Of the division of sacrifice 714
.
Bk. 4
14th Distinction
Lombard 1
1. Whether penitence by necessity may be required to the removal of mortal sin after baptism has been joined 7
2. Whether the act of penitence requisite to the removal of mortal sin be some act of virtue 48
3. Whether the virtue of penitence may be only of one inflicted punishment 123
4. Whether through the sacrament of penitence guilt may be removed 139
15th Distinction
1. Whether any actual, mortal sin may correspond to a particular satisfaction 173
2. Whether any who unjustly takes away or detains a thing not their own may be bound to restore that thing, so that one may not be truly penitent without such restitution 255
3. Whether one who harms another through the goods of the person, whether of the body or soul, ought to restore to this one, that he may be able to be truly penitent 357
4. Whether one who harms anyone by the good of his reputation may be bound to restitution, so that he is not able to be truly penitent without his reputation being restored 391
16th Distinction
1. Whether these three, contrition, confession and satisfaction, are parts of penitence 416
2. Whether remission or expulsion of guilt and the infusion of grace may be one change simply 427
17. Whether it may be necessary to salvation for a sinner to confess all his sins to his priest 503
18. Whether the power of the keys may extend only in a way with itself, or to a temporal punishment 599
19. Whether the keys of the kingdom of heaven may be conferred to any priest in the taking of a priestly order 604
20. Whether penitence in last rites may have power unto salvation 682
21st Distinction
1. Whether after this life any sin may be demitted 693
2. Whether a confessor in any case may be bound to conceal to himself a sin detected in confession 730
22. Whether sins having been demitted through penitence in one relapsing may return to the same number 765
.
Bk. 4
23. Whether extreme unction may be a sacrament of the new Law 3
24. Whether in the Church may be seven orders, such that, by which order or ordination a sacrament may be posited 45
25th Distinction
1. Whether a canonical punishment may impede from the taking and receiving of the orders 110
2. Whether the female sex or a young age may impede taking of orders 137
26. Whether matrimony was immediately instituted by God 146
27th Distinction
1. Whether it may be said conveniently that matrimony of a man and woman by a marital union, between legitimate persons, binds an indissoluble life 193
2. Whether express consent through words may be sufficient cause of matrimony 199
28. Whether only the consent of a present expression by words may cause matrimony 204
29. Whether a forced consent may be sufficient to contracting true marriage 214
30th Distinction
1. Whether to the contract of marriage may be required a consent, or apprehension, following a rule (or reason) not-erroneous 243
2. Whether between Mary and Joseph there was a true marriage 272
31. Whether there may be three goods of marriage, which the Master puts forth in writing, even faith, progeny and the sacrament 300
32. Whether it may be simply necessary in marriage to provide the debt being petitioned 333
33rd Distinction
1. Whether bigamy was licit at any time 358
2. Whether a bigamist before baptism may be able after baptism to be ordained 374
3. Whether in the Mosaic Law it was licit to divorce (repudiate) a wife 384
34. Whether an impotent person may be impeded from joining in marriage simply 400
35. Whether adultery with someone, with a living husband, may impede marriage with the same person after the death of that man 432
36th Distinction
1. Whether servitude may impede marriage 445
2. Whether a young age may be able to impede marriage 459
37. Whether the sacrament of order may impede marriage 466
38. Whether a vow of continence may impede marriage 479
39. Whether the disparity of religion may impede marriage 503
40. Whether consanguinity may impede marriage 517
41. Whether affinity may impede marriage 537
42. Whether spiritual kinship may impede marriage 550
.
Bk. 4
43rd Distinction
1. Whether a general resurrection of men may be future 4
2. Whether there may be a sign through natural reason that a general resurrection of men be future 34
3. Whether nature may be able to be the active cause of the resurrection 65
4. Whether a resurrection may be natural 112
5. Whether a future resurrection may be in an instant 117
44th Distinction
1. Whether the whole in any man will be resurrected that was truly of human nature in him 161
2. Whether infernal fire may afflict malignant spirits 208
3. Whether damned men after the judgment will be afflicted with that infernal fire 249
45th Distinction
1. Whether the separated soul may be able to understand quiddities (whatnesses) for itself which it had habitually known before the separation 263
2. Whether the separated soul may be able to acquire the knowledge of something previously unknown 279
3. Whether the separated soul may be able to be reminded of past things he had known having been joined (to a body) 324
4. Whether the blessed are cognizant of prayers we offer 375
46th Distinction
1. Whether in God may be justice 399
2. Whether in God may be mercy 442
3. Whether in God may be distinguished justice and mercy 446
4. Whether in the punishment of the wicked on the part of God may concur punishing by justice with mercy 452
47th Distinction
1. Whether a universal judgment may be future 491
2. Whether the world is to be purged by fire 503
48th Distinction
1. Whether Christ will judge in human form 511
2. Whether in the judgment, or after, the motion of the heavenly bodies will cease 523
.
Bk. 4
49th Distinction
1. Whether beatitude may consistper sein operation 5
2. Whether immediate beatitude may perfect the essence or a power of the blessed person 7
3. Whether blessedness per se may consist in many operations simultaneously 76
4. Whether blessedness per se may consist in the act of the intellect or of the will 123
5. Whether blessedness, which is fruition, may consist simply in act 170
6. Whether to the essence of beatitude may pertain security 180
7. Whether joy of a blessed object may be of the essence of beatitude, or pertain to its essence 271
8. Whether human nature may be a nature deeply capable of blessedness 303
9. Whether all men may necessarily want the sum of blessedness 316
10. Whether all which strive, strive for blessedness 317
11. Whether a man from pure nature may be able to pursue blessedness 388
12. Whether a man subject to death may be able to pursue blessedness 439
13. Whether the body of a blessed man after the resurrection will be impassible 447
14. Whether the bodies of the blessed will be agile 473
15. Whether the glorified body will be shining 494
16. Whether the blessed body, through the gift of subtlety, may be able to simultaneously be with another body 502
50th Distinction
1. Whether anyone according to right reason, to flee misery, is able to desire not to be 528
2. Whether the damned may desire not to exist due to fleeing misery 529
3. Whether the blessed may see the punishments of the damned 543
4. Whether the punishment of the damned may be equal 549
5. Whether the beatitude of all the blessed may be equal 549
6. Whether the beatitude of their bodies will be equal 550
Thomas of Sutton – The First Book of the Sentences contra Johannes Scotus (1523) ToC
Thomas (1230-1320) was an English Dominican theologian and an early Thomist who opposed Duns Scotus.
.
Bk. 1
Prologue 1
1. 12
2. 18
3. 35b
4. 53b
5. 55
6. 58
7. 59b
8. 65b
9. 76
10. 76b
11. 77
12. 79b
13. 82
14-16. 85
17. 85b
18. [Not Present]
19. 92b
20. 94b
21. 96
22. 96b
23. 97
24. 98
25. 98
26. 98b
27. 101b
28. 104
29. 107
30. 107b
31. 110b
32-34. 112
34. 113
35. 113b
36. 115
37. 116b
38. 117
39. 118
40. 121b
41. 122
42. 123
43. 123b
44. 124
45. 124
46. 125
47. 125
48. 125b
.
Giles of Rome – Commentaries on the Master’s Books of the Sentences, bk. 1, 2, 3 (d. 1316; 1581-1699) ToC 1, 2, 3
Giles (c. 1243–1316) was a medieval philosopher and Scholastic theologian and a friar of the Order of St Augustine, who was also appointed to the positions of prior general of his order and as Archbishop of Bourges. He is famed as being a logician, who produced a commentary on the Organon by Aristotle, and as the author of two important works: De ecclesiastica potestate, a major text of early-14th-century papalism, and De regimine principum, a guide book for Christian temporal leadership. Giles was styled Doctor Fundatissimus (“Best-Grounded Teacher”) by Pope Benedict XIV.
Andreas, Antonius – A Long Work Most Absolute on the Four Books of Sentences (Venice: Damian Zenarum, 1578) 180 fol. ToC Index
Andreas (c.1280-1320) was a Spanish Franciscan theologian and a pupil of Duns Scotus. He was teaching at the University of Lleida (Spain) in 1315 and was nicknamed Doctor Dulcifluus or Doctor Scotellus (which was applied as well to Peter of Aquila).
Aureoli, Peter – Commentaries on the Books of the Sentences, bk. 1, 2, 3, 4 (d. 1322; Rome: 1595-1596) Indices: Subject 1, 2, 3, 4; Scripture 1, 2, 3, 4
Aureoli (c. 1280 – 1322) was a scholastic philosopher and theologian. Here is a list of editions of Aureoli’s works.
Natalis, Herveus – A Volume on the Four Books of Peter Lombard’s Sentences, bk. 1, 2, 3, 4 (1505) ToC (bk. 1, 1-8)
Natalis (c. 1260 – 1323) was a Dominican theologian and the author of a number of works on philosophy and theology. His many writings include the Summa Totius Logicae.
Augustine of Ancona – Commentarius in Libros Sententiarum Selections
Augustinus (1243–1328) was a hermit of St. Augustine and writer. He is celebrated for his work Summa de potestate ecclesiastica, printed in 1473. The Summa became a standard reference for papalist arguments in the later 16th century. Alongside James of Viterbo, Giles of Rome, and Alvarus Pelagius, Augustinus was among the leading pro-papal jurists. His title Triumphus is first attested in the 16th century.
Francis of Meyronnes – An Illuminated Writing on the Four Books of Sentences (d. 1328; 1520) Index 1, 2, 3
Francis (c. 1280–1328) was a French scholastic philosopher. He was a distinguished pupil of Duns Scotus, whose teaching he usually followed. He acquired a great reputation for ability in discussion at the Sorbonne, and was known as the Doctor Illuminatus, ‘Enlightened teacher’, as Magister Acutus or Doctor Acutus, and as Magister Abstractionum, ‘Master of abstractions’.
William of Crathorn – Quaestiones super librum sententiarum Partial ToC
Crathorn (fl. c. 1330) was an English Dominican philosopher, from Oxford. He was a philosopher who immediately followed in the intellectual tradition of William of Ockham and worked to strengthen his philosophical works. Crathorn created unique theories in the philosophy of language and psychology, as well as in epistemology by focusing on the claims of skeptics.
Durandus of St. Pourcain – Four Books of Commentaries on the Theological Sentences of Peter Lombard (Leiden: William Rovillium, 1563) ToC 1, 2, 3, 4 Index
Durandus (c. 1275 – 1332 / 1334) was a French Dominican, philosopher, theologian, and bishop.
He lectured on the “Sentences” of Peter Lombard. He was at this time submitting ideas that were not exactly parallel to those of Thomas Aquinas. This was the production of his first extensive commentary on the “Sentences”, published in 1303–8 (unedited). This caused Durand to be criticized from one of the leading Dominican followers of Aquinas, Hervaeus Natalis. It was at this time that Durandus of Saint-Pourçain set out to write his second commentary on the “Sentences”, which he adhered more closely to Aquinas’s way. This second version of the commentary was written around 1310–1312 (unedited). Later Durand wrote his last of the three commentaries, the one for which he is most famous. In this final commentary, Durand returned to several of his initial stances. He became known as Doctor Resolutissimus owing to his strenuous advocacy of certain opinions novel to contemporary academics and he was influential throughout the early modern period.
William of Rubio – On the Four Books of the Master’s Sentences, vol. 1 (bks. 1-2), 2 (bks. 3-4) (1334; Paris: Simon & Michael Conrad, 1518) ToC 1, 2
William (b. 1290) from the Franciscan Province of Aragon, was a student at Paris between 1315 and 1325, possibly under Francis de la March. The Franciscan General Chapter of Assisi, meeting in 1334, examined and approved his commentary on the Sentences. No manuscript of his work survives, yet there was an edition published at Paris in 1518.
Roseth, Roger – Lectura super Sententias, folios 1b-44a (mid-1330’s)
Roseth was a Franciscan scholar from England active in the 1330’s. He belonged to the generation of Franciscan scholars immediately following William of Ockham. Roseth composed his only surviving work, a Sentences commentary, in the mid 1330s. Where Roseth received his theological education is not known, but his affiliation with Oxford authors, his style, and the content of his book all suggest that he was trained in England. Although we know little about Roseth, his work was once rather renowned: at least 17 preserved manuscripts containing the text or parts of it attest to its popularity. Roseth displays a strong interest in contemporary logic and natural philosophy; he is considered to be one of the key witnesses of the significance of Oxford calculators for English theology.
Gerard of Siena – Commentary on the Books of the Sentences, bk. 1, 2, 3, 4
Gerard (1295-1336) was an Italian theologian, a student of Giles of Rome and of an Augustinian order.
Peter of Palude – On the Sentences, bk. 3, 4 (1517; 1552) ToC 3, 4
Palude (c. 1275–1342) was a French theologian and archbishop.
Walter Chatton
Lectura super Sententias: Liber I, vol. 1 (dist. 1-2), 2 (3-7), 3 (8-17) eds. Joseph C. Wey & Girard J. Etzkorn in Studies & Texts, 156, 158, 164 (1324–1330; Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 2007-2009) ToC 1, 2
Reportatio super Sententias, vol. 1 (bk. 1, 1-9), 2 (bk. 1, 10-48), 3 (bk. 2), 4 (bks. 3-4) eds. Joseph C. Wey & Girard J. Etzkorn in Studies & Texts, 141, 148, 149 (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 2002, 2004, 2005) ToC
Chatton (c. 1290–1343) was an English Scholastic theologian and philosopher who regularly sparred philosophically with William of Ockham, who is well known for Occam’s razor. Chatton proposed an “anti-razor”. From his Lectura I d. 3, q. 1, a. 1:
“Whenever an affirmative proposition is apt to be verified for actually existing things, if two things, howsoever they are present according to arrangement and duration, cannot suffice for the verification of the proposition while another thing is lacking, then one must posit that other thing.”
Mirecourt, John – Commentary Selections
Mirecourt (b. 1310 to 1315; fl. 1345-1347) also known as Monachus Albus (‘the White Monk’), was a Cistercian scholastic philosopher of the fourteenth century, from Mirecourt, Lorraine. He was a follower of William of Ockham; he was censured by Pope Clement VI.
William of Ockham – Annotations on the Four Books of the Sentences (Leiden: Johann Trechsel, 1495) ToC Index
William (c. 1287–1347) was an English Franciscan friar, scholastic philosopher, apologist and theologian who is believed to have been born in Ockham, a small village in Surrey. He is considered to be one of the major figures of medieval thought and was at the center of the major intellectual and political controversies of the 14th century. He is commonly known for Occam’s razor, and he also produced significant works on logic, physics and theology.
Bassolis, Jon – Commentary on the Books of the Sentences
Bassolis (d. 1347)
Robert Holcot – Argued Questions on the Four Books of the Sentences (Joannes Clein, 1518) ToC Index
Holcot (c. 1290 – 1349) was an English Dominican scholastic philosopher, theologian and influential Biblical scholar.
Thomas of Buckingham – Commentary, folios 45a-80b
Thomas (d. 1351), an English cleric and chancellor of Exeter cathedral.
Thomas of Strasbourg – Commentary on the Four Books of the Sentences (Genoa: Orerius, 1585) ToC Index
Thomas (d. 1357) was a fourteenth-century scholastic of the Augustinian Order.
Adam Wodeham
The Second Lecture (bk. 1, dist. 1-26) Selection
eds. Gal, Gedeon & Rega Wood – Lectura secunda in librum primum sententiarum, vols. 1 (Prologue & Dist. 1), 2 (Dist. 2-7), 3 (Dist. 8-26) (NY: St. Bonaventure, 1990)
On the Four Books of the Sentences ed. John Major (1512) Selections
Wodeham (1298–1358) was a philosopher and theologian. Currently, Wodeham is best known for having been a secretary of William Ockham and for his interpretations of John Duns Scotus.
Gregory of Rimini
On the First & Second of the Sentences, vol. 1, 2 (Giunta, 1522) ToC 1, 2 Index 1, 2 Bks. 3-4 were never written or lost. Here is a modern fascimile reprint of the 1522 edition which is much easier to read: Franciscan Institute Publications, Text Series no. 7, ed. Eligius Buytaert (St. Bonaventure NY: Franciscan Institute, 1955); the page numbers match. Rimini also has a critical edition by De Gruyter (1981) in 7 vols. Pre 1 (bk 1: 1-6), 2 (7-17), 3, 4 (bk 2: 1-5), 5 (6-18), 6 (24-44), 7 (Indices)
Gregory (c. 1300–1358) was one of the great scholastic philosophers and theologians of the Middle Ages. He was the first scholastic writer to unite the Oxonian and Parisian traditions in 14th-century philosophy, and his work had a lasting influence in the Late Middle Ages and Reformation. His scholastic nicknames were Doctor acutus and Doctor authenticus.
His views strongly influenced some of the Protestant Reformers. Gregory adhered to Augustine’s predestination and famously condemned unbaptized infants to Hell, for which he gained the nickname Infantium Tortor (torturer, or tormentor, of infants). Gregory taught the doctrines of double predestination and limited atonement.
Gregory Rimini had a unique take on traditional nominalist views. He believed that mental objects are used strictly for convenient social conventions and nothing else.
.
ToC
Bk. 1
Prologue 1
1. Whether with respect to the object of theology, the knowledge acquired is properly wisdom (scientifica) 1
1. What may be the object of the wisdom 1
2. Whether theological discourse speaks properly 2
3. Whether the intellect, by its acts and habits, is properly said to know or to understand (scientia) 3
4. That which is principally queried 5
2. Whether concerning this object one is able to have wisdom (scientia) or opinion 7b
1. Whether of the same object of which is theology, one may be able to have wisdom or opinion, whether it is from this same thing, or from another thing with another 7
2. Whether man is able to simultaneously have wisdom and theology of this same object 8
3. Whether man is able simultaneously to have wisdom and opinion of this same thing 10
4. Whether from the same, of the same, one is able to have wisdom and opinion 10
3. Whether the concluding theological object may be one habit 11
1. Whether plural conclusions may be one habit by number 14
2. In what way a multitude of conclusions may be one habit by number; in what way not 15
3. Of the principel question 15
4. Whether God as God may be the subject in theology 15
1. Which may be the proper subject of knowledge insofar… 15
2. Is of the principal question 16
5. Whether theology may be speculative or practical 18
1. What is properly spoken of practice: from which habit practice is called
2. Whether understanding (notitia) may be properly practical and speculative 19
3. [difficult to translate] 21
4. Of the principal question 22
1. 22b
1. Whether the use of things may be enjoyment (fruitio), or the act to use may be an act to enjoy 22
1. Whether an act of the will may be a using or an enjoying 22
2. Whether the use of things may be an enjoyment is that which is principally queried 23
3. Whether use and enjoyment may be able to be (the same?) in the will 24
2. Whether enjoyment is an act solely of the will 25
1. [blotted out in ToC]
2. [blotted out in ToC]
3. Whether enjoyment may be a loving, or another operation solely of the will 29
3. Whether one may enjoy with reference to God only 29
1. In what things the will may be able to enjoy 29
2. In what things the will may be able to use 30
3. Whether some created enjoyment may be able to be the enjoyment of another objectively; and similarly it is queried of understanding (notitia) 32
Whether God may be known through Himself 33
1. That He says He is known through Himself 33
2. Is of the question 33
2. 33
1. Whether God may be known through Himself 33
1. That He says He is known through Himself 33
2. Is of the question 35
3. 36
1. Whether sensible things may be understood by us naturally 36
1. Two conclusions are put forth beside the distinction by premissed distinctions 36
2. Contains four doubts on sensitive notions 38
2. Whether insensible created things may be naturally known by us 44
1. Is of the question 44
2. Contains four doubts and solves them 45
3. [blotted out in ToC]
1. [blotted out in ToC]
2. Whether a universal may be the first cognition from the intellect rather than a singular, or the converse 47
3. Whether a sensible singular may be [???] known and a purely intelligiable singular 48
4. Whether we are able to naturally know God 49
4. 52b
1. Whether for the Father to generate may be in the Father Himself 52b
2. Whether this may be true: God has generated God 52b
5. 53
1. Whether the divine essence may beget or be begotten 53
2. Whether the divine essence may be formally… or the whole teriminus of divine begetting 55
1. Whether the essential substance or divine nature may be the subject of divine generation 56
2. Whether that itself may be the formal terminus of begetting 57
6. 58b
Whether the Father generated the Son by necessity or by will 58b
1. Whether the Father begot the Son by necessity 59
2. Whether naturally 59
3. Whether voluntarily 59
7. 63
Whether the divine essence may be the power or principle of generating the Son 63
1. Whether in divinity may be some true elicit power or principle producing to the inside (ad intra) 63
2. It is inquired whether such a principle may be the essence or a relation, or something other 64
8. 65b
1. [On simplicity and distinctions about plural attributes] 65
1. [blotted out in ToC] 66
2. Of the truth of that and of the question 66
2. Whether the attributed perfections may be distinguished by reason 68
1. Is of the question 68
2. Whether the attributes are distinguished by reason 71
3. Whether any attribute may be predicated in some way of God and of another attribute 71
4. Whether an abstract attribute and its concrete thing, spoken of God, may be synonymous 74
3. Whether, since divine simplicity may be compatible, God may be some thing of a genus or of another predication 74
1. Whether according to the simplicity of God that is to be denied 74
2. Whether according to some other thing that is to be denied 75
9. 77
Whether the divine will may be that which is producing the Holy Spirit 77
1. Is of the question 77
2. Whether the Holy Spirit may be produced freely or naturally 78
10. 79
1. Whether the divine will may have been [???] producing the Holy Spirit 79
1. Is of the question 79
2. Whether the Holy Spirit may be produced freely or naturally 79
11. 81
1. Whether if the Holy Spirit may not be proceeding from the Son 81
[blotted out of ToC]
12. 82b
Whether the Father and Son may be one principle spirating the Holy Spirit 82b
13. 83b
Whether the procession of the Holy Spirit by spiration may be a begetting 83b
14-16. 83b
Whether the Holy Spirit, the third Person in the Trinity with the Father and the Son, One God substantially, may be sent, or given to the creature temporally, or not Himself, but his gift 83b
1. Consists in some conclusions 83
2. On doubts and solutions 84
17. 85b
1. Whether it may be possible by some merit to love God, not having in oneself a created habit of charity infused 85b
1. Is of the question [??] the ordained power of God 89
2. Is of the same [??] the absolute power of God 89
2. Whether some intensive augmentation of the corporal form may be a continuous motion 89
1. Is of the question 89
2. Whether any form newly acquired may be given… 91
3. Whether whatever such form form may be given minimally 95
4. Whether in whatever intention may be given the first intending 98
3. Whether a corporal form may be intended… 99
1. [blotted out of ToC]
2. [blotted out of ToC]
4. [blotted out of ToC] 104
1. Is of the question 105
2. Whether a prior part may remain [???] with a part following 107
5. Whether charity may be able to be augmented 111
1. Is of the question 111
2. Solves two doubts and contains two conclusions 112
6. Whether charity may be able to be augmented to infinity… 117
[18 is not existant]
19-20. 119b
Whether the divine persons are equal in magnitude and power 119b
1. Whether the divine Persons may be equal in magnitude 119b
2. Whether they may be equal in power 120
[21-23 is not existant]
24. 120b
1. Whether ‘one’, which is the principle of number, may be truly spoken of God 120
1. Whether ‘one’, convertible with being, may be spoken of God 120
2. Is of the question 122
2. Whether numeral terms be greatly important, and thus ‘two’ and ‘three’ may be spoken of divine persons 123
1. Whether any number may be held through the apprehension of the soul 123
2. Whether it may be a distinct thing from the things of number 124
3. Whether even it may be in corporal things 126
4. Whether three persons may be a true number 126
[25 is not existant]
26-27. 127
Whether the divine Persons are constituted by their properties and in turn personally distinguished 127
1. Some distinctions are posited 127
2. Four conclusions are put forth 127
30[?]
1. Whether a relation is an outside thing ??? distinct from every thing ??? 128
1. Whether every relation may be subjectively or objectively in the soul 128
2. Of the principal question 129
28. 129b
1. Whether any relation may be a true thing not existing or an operation of the soul 129
1. One distinction on the acception of this named relation 129
2. Three conclusions 129
2. Whether any relation may be an entity distinct from that absolute entity 132
3. Whether God may be really referred to the creature; four conclusions with objections 138
[Not existant]
33-34. 140
Whether in God the Person or personal property may distinguish from the divine essence… 140
1. Recites an opinion and disapproves from them 141
2. Is of the question, containing four conclusions 141
3. Contains four doubts on the same 142
35-36. 144
1. [blotted out of ToC] 144
[Not existant]
38. 147
1. Whether any singular enunciation of God is categorical of the future in the matter of contingency unto whatever is the truth 147
1. Shows what was Aristotle’s opinion 147
2. What [???] truth ought to be held 148
3. What contingency is a contingency opposing this sense: All that is which is necessary is being. 149
2. Whether God may know all future things 151
1. Distinctions on God and future things are premitted 151
2. Is of the way in which God knows future things 152
3. Whether with the prescience of God [???] future things may be put forth as contingently future 153
39. 156
Whether the knowledge (scia) or prescience of God may be able to be augmented or lessened by any premissed distinctions 156
1. Contains six conclusions by which are shown whether God… 156
2. On the knowledge [scientia] of enunciations 156
40-41. 157
Whether any man from eternity was predestined or reprobated of God 157
1. Is of the question 157
2. Whether in predestination there may be some cause of his predestination, and in reprobates similarly 157
3. Whether it may be possible someone predestined be damned or someone reprobated saved 158
42-44. 161b
Whether God may be able to make by his absolute power everything possible to be made 161b
1. Whether God is able to make every possible being of his absolute power 161
1. Distinctions on possibility and power are premitted 161
2. Corollaries inferred contra cases objected 162
2. Whether God is able to speak falsely 165
1. Distinctions are possited on speaking falsely 165
2. Conclusions and solution 167
3. Whether it follows… to posit God to be of infinite power or of virtue intensively 168
1. They perceive [???] and his [???] 168
2. What is the truth of the judgment 169
3. Contra sayings objected and solution 170
4. Whether God by his infinite power may be able to produce some infinite act 171
1. Three conclusions with their proofs 171
2. Objections with their solutions 172
3. Whether the infinite may be able to… 176
45. 177
Whether God’s will may be the first efficient cause of all things which have been made
1. Distinctions are set forth on causes 177
2. Seven conclusions are put forth with their proofs 177
46-47. 179
Whether God’s will may be fulfilled? 179
1. They put forth some distinctions on God’s will 179
2. They put forth two conclusions 180
48. 181-81b
1.
1. …to the question on the will of sign 181
2. On the will of good-pleasure they put forth three conclusions with objections [???] 181
Bk. 2
1. 1
1. Whether Aristotle and (?) Averroes may have perceived all other beings from the first to be made, or more ably refuted those having the opinion that many beings do not have an effective principle 1
2. Whether the conclusion with respect to Aristotle, that many beings lack an effective principle, has been evidently proved from himself by effective reason, or is able to be proved out of his sayings
3. Whether through some potential it was possible one thing rather than another thing was from God from eternity or was itself without principle or duration
4. Whether a motion is some thing distinct ??? itself from every thing permanently one, or many things
5. Whether an action is a thing distinct from a thing which is and from working and passion, even from passion itself
6. Whether creation and conservation are distinct entities amongst themselves and are from the thing which God may create or conserve
2. 26
1. Whether angels were before time or after
2. Whether an angel may be in a divisible or indivisible place
3. Whether an angel may be able to simultaneously be in many places
3-5. 41
Whether an angel was able in any first instance to sin or to merit
6. 46
1. Whether an angel is able to move locally from itself
2. Whether an angel is able to move from place to place in some temporal succession
3. Whether an angel is able to move from place to place in an instant
7. 52
1. Whether a hardened angel may be able by a proper virtue remaining by the common influence of God to elicit to will some some good
2. Whether whatever thing an angel understands he may understand by an intellection from the thing which he understands, which is essentially distinct from his intellect
3. Whether angels know things through species distinct from actual notions by which they know things themselves
4. Whether we are able to naturally contemplate or know by intuition something not existing
5. Whether an angel receives by his intellections species and intellections by which he naturally knows other things
[Not existant]
9-10. 70
1. Whether one angel naturally of himself may be able to know distinctly and intuitively cognitions of other angels and even ourselves
2. Whether an angel is able naturally to speak to another angel by an intellectual speaking
11. Whether every angel of them may simultaneously have, or be able to have, species, himself naturally being able to know by a distinct act 72
12. 75
1. Whether substantial corporal matter may be an entity by a distinct act from its form
2. Whether generatable and corruptible substantial matter from whatever form it is itself informing may be naturally separable
[Not existant]
15. Whether in generated mixed things out of the elements the essences remain of those elements 80
16-17. 81.b
1. Whether one is able to evidently prove the intellective soul ???, by which man is, according to the image of God, to be the substantial form of man
2. Whether besides the intellective soul, there may be some other substantial form in man
3. Whether in man the sensitive and intellective powers may be really distinguished from his soul
18. Whether out of the rib of Adam without another matieral added was the body of Eve formed 89
[Not existant]
24-25. 90.b
Whether the will of man may be the immediate productive cause of the acts of free choice
26-28. 92
1. Whether man in the present state standing by the influence of God may be able naturally(?) through free choice and his natural powers, without the special help of God to do some morally good act
2. Whether man in the present state is able, out of his natural powers without the special help of God is able to escape any sin
29. 103.b
Whether man before sin needed operating and cooperating grace
30-33. 115.b
1. Whether original sin may be a punishment or guilt
2. Whether the blessed Virgin Mary was conceived with original sin
3. Whether those dying with only original sin are punished by some punishment of sense
34-37. 116.b
Whether God may be the immediate effecting cause of actual sin
38-41. Whether goodness or badness in the work of it may work the goodness or badness of its intention 123.b
42-44. Whether a man may simultaneously sin more by a bad will and a concomitant exterior operation than by a bad will itself alone(?) 127.b
Additions [These are in the ToC but not the volume.]
1.
Whether one may be abe to naturally, evidentally know that there is one universal principle from which other entities are produced
Whether by natural reason it may be evidently probable that God is the universal and last end of other entities
2. Whether angels were created simultaneously with time or before or after time
7. Whether an angel may be understood through a distinct species from an actual intellection
9. Whether one receives species which, being from angelic things, are causes of intellections, which things he himself understands or turns about
12. Whether in the presently standing state one is able by the general influence of God, through free choice and his natural powers, without the special grace of God, to do some morally good act
Remaining additions which are not principles of questions
Richard Fitzralph – Lectures on the Sentences Selections
FitzRalph (c. 1300 – 1360) was a scholastic philosopher, theologian, and Norman Irish Archbishop of Armagh during the 14th century. His thought exerted a significant influence on John Wycliffe’s.
Richard of Kilvington – Questiones super libros Sententiarum This includes only 8 questions; two are in English above.
Richard (c. 1302-1361) was an English scholastic theologian and philosopher at the University of Oxford. His surviving works are lecture notes from the 1320s and 1330s. He was involved in a controversy over the nature of the infinite, with Richard FitzRalph.
Peter of Aquila – Commentaries on the Four Books of the Sentences of Master Peter Lombard, vol. 1 (bk. 1), 2 (bk. 2), 3 (bk. 3), 4 (bk. 4) ed. Cypriano Paolini (Levant, 1907–09) ToC 1, 2, 3, 4
Peter (d. 1361) was an Italian Friar Minor, theologian and bishop. He was an able interpreter of John Duns Scotus, and was called Doctor Sufficiens. His chief works are commentaries on the four books of Sentences, which being a compendium of the doctrine of Scotus were called Scotellum, whence the author’s surname “Scotellus”.
Facinus of Ast – Lecture on the Books of the Sentences (1361-1363; 1390 / 1399)
Facinus (fl. 1361-1363) was probably from the Italian town of Asti. Facinus lectured on the Sentences in 1361-1363 at Paris. He left Paris as baccalaureus formatus for Avignon (cf. Trapp) or Bologna (cf. Courtenay).
John of Ripa – Conclusions around the Books of the Sentences ed. Andre Combes (Paris, 1957) 320 pp. ToC
John (fl. 1357–1368) was a Franciscan philosopher, living and teaching in Paris. John’s philosophical interests included Christology and the metaphysics of awareness. He responded critically to the philosophy of Duns Scotus, and Augustinian scholar Damasus Trapp argues that he was also influenced by the thinking of Richard Brinkley. John, in turn, was an influence on Louis of Padua and Lambert of Gelderen.
Jacobus of Altavilla
Lectura in libros Sententiarum I: Principium, Questiones 1-6 in Corpus Christianorum Continuatio Mediaevalis, vol. 312 (Brepols, 2024) ToC
Commentary on the Second & Third Books of the Sentences (1369-1370) Partial ToC
Jacobus (b. 2nd quarter of 1300’s – d. 1393). He began his studies at a Cistercian abbey and continued his formation at St. Bernard college in Paris where he lectured on the Sentences during the academic year 1369-1370. In 1373 he became a doctor of theology. In 1372 he was already abbot of Eberbach. According to some sources, he was close to Matthew of Kraków. His gravestone became a pilgrimage site in the 17th century.
Dionysius of Montina – A Book on the Four Books of Sentences (1371-1372; Paris) 350 pp. Index
Dionysius (fl. 1371-1375) is attested in 1375 as a doctor of theology in Paris and is known as a representative of the late medieval Augustinian school with its moderate nominalism and its return to Augustine. In his reading of sentences (1371–72) he joined the Cistercian Konrad von Ebrach, with whose commentary on sentences it was strongly mixed and printed in Paris in 1511 as Dionysius Cisterciensis or Pseudo-Dionysius Cisterciensis.
Hugolino of Orvieto – Commentarius in quattuor libros Sententiarum ToC
Hugolino (after 1300 – 1373) was an important Scholastic theologian and Augustinian friar of the fourteenth century, representing the Augustinian School of thought within the theological and philosophical spheres.
Hugolino’s thought was rooted strongly in that of St Augustine and his fellow Augustinian friar, Gregory of Rimini, and Hugolino attacked the Aristotelianism that prevailed prior to the fourteenth century within the theological sphere, particularly with regards to Aristotelian ethics. He focused particularly on Augustine’s notion of divine illumination, and maintained the necessity of God’s grace in all the morally good acts that the human performs. Hugolino strongly opposed Joachim of Fiore’s understanding of the Trinity.
Henry Totting of Oyta – Commentary on the Third Book of the Sentences (c. 1374)
Totting (c. 1330 – 1397) was a German theologian and nominalist philosopher. Around 1374 he abridged the Sentences commentary of Adam Wodeham.
John Klenkok – Expositio litteralis in quattuor libris Sententiarum
Klenkok (c. 1310 – 1374) was a German Augustinian friar, known as a theologian and disciple of Gregory of Rimini.
Petrus Gracilis – Commentary on the Books of the Sentences (1378-1379) Selections
Gracilis (1378-1379)
Brammart of Aquisgrano, Johannes – Commentary on the Books of the Sentences, bk. 1, 2, 3, 4 (1380-1404)
Brammart (1330-1407) was a Carmelite theologian who belonged to the nominalist tendency, but in the question of the relationship between faith and knowledge he did not assume a contradiction between the two or a double truth. In 1389 he was one of the co-founders of the University of Cologne.
John Hiltalingen of Basel – Commentaria in libros sententiarum Selections
Hiltalingen (1315?–1392) was a Swiss Augustinian theologian who became Bishop of Lombez.
Marsilius of Inghen
Questions upon the Four Books of the Sentences, vol. 1, 2 (Flach, 1501) ToC Index
Quaestiones super quattuor libros Sententiarum, vol. 1, 2, 3 (bk. 1, q. 22-37) Pre 3 (Brill, 2015)
Marsilius (c. 1340 – 1396) was a medieval Dutch Scholastic philosopher who studied with Albert of Saxony and Nicole Oresme under Jean Buridan. He was Magister at the University of Paris as well as at the University of Heidelberg.
Andreas of Novo Castro – Commentary on the Books of the Sentences, bk. 1, 2, 3, 4
Andreas (d. c. 1400) was a scholastic philosopher of the fourteenth century. He was a Franciscan from Lorraine, who wrote a number of works. He earned the name Doctor Ingeniosissimus (most ingenious Doctor).
In philosophy he opposed Nicholas of Autrecourt, and also the nominalist Augustinian Gregory of Rimini. On the dependence of natural law on divine will he followed Pierre d’Ailly. His Sentences commentary was printed in Paris in 1514.
1400’s
Arnoldus of Seehusen – Commentarius in libros Sententiarum, Quaestio 7 in librum IV Sententiarum Ref (1404) 674 pp.
Arnold (fl. 1404-1408)
Peter of Candia – Sentences Commentary
Candia (c. 1339 – 1410), or Antipope Alexander V, was an antipope elected by the Council of Pisa during the Western Schism (1378–1417). He reigned briefly from 26 June 1409, to his death in 1410.
See Stephen F. Brown, “Peter of Canida’s Commentary on the Sentences of Peter Lombard” in ed. Philipp W. Rosemann, Mediaeval Commentaries on the Sentences of Peter Lombard, vol. 2 (Brill, 2010), pp. 439–70
Boltenhagen, Henningus – Sentences Commentary Selection
Boltenhagen was a president of Leipzig University in 1413.
Plaoul, Peter
Reportatio Sentences Commentary
Reportatio A Sentences Commentary Selections
Plaoul (1353–1415) was a late medieval Scholastic philosopher and theologian. While the content of his thought remains relatively unknown, Plaoul is often noted for his role in ending the Great Schism.
Hus, John – On the Four Books of Sentences 744 pp. ToC Indices: Subjects, Scripture, Authors, Names
Hus (c. 1370–1415) was a Czech theologian and philosopher who became a Church reformer and the inspiration of Hussitism, a key predecessor to Protestantism, and a seminal figure in the Bohemian Reformation. His teachings had a strong influence, most immediately in the approval of a reformed Bohemian religious denomination and, over a century later, on Martin Luther.
Petrus of Ailly – Questions on Peter Lombard’s Books of Sentences (Wolf, 1500) 475 pp. ToC
Petrus (1351–1420) was a French theologian, astrologer and cardinal.
Nicolas of Dinkelsbuhl – Questions on the Fourth Book of the Sentences: Miscellaneous Lectures (1453) Selections
Nicolas (c. 1360 – 1433) was an Austrian clergyman, pulpit orator and theologian.
Stetzing, Kilian – Commentary on the 3rd & 4th Books of the Sentences of Peter Lombard (1435, manuscipt)
Stetzing (c. 1400 – post-1435) was a Franciscan theologian. His work reflects a comprehensive education, is strongly influenced by Johannes Duns Scotus in terms of the history of ideas, like the entire Erfurt School. In addition, thoughts of St. Bonaventure on the vita contemplativa flowed in. Everything is supported by a strong, sometimes childlike piety. His clear style and clear presentation make him appear to be an important teacher of Erfurt studies.
Capreolus, Johannes – Defenses of the Theology of Thomas Aquinas the Divine (on the Sentences of Lombard), 7 vols PRDL
Capreolus (c. 1380 – 1444) was a French Dominican theologian and Thomist.
Conrad of Halberstadt, Junior – Excerpts out of the Four Books of the Sentences of Peter Lombard
Conrad Junior (1401-1450) is difficult to identify. See also here, here and here.
Oswald Anglicanus – Lecture upon the Sententes, folios 81a-146b
Oswald was a mid fourteenth-century Carmelite scholar.
William of Vorillon
A Compendium of the Four Books of the Sentences (Paris, 1448; Basel, 1510) 1000 pp. Indices: Questions, Distinctions, Sentences
William (c. 1390-1463) was a French philosopher and theologian. He wrote a biography of Duns Scotus.
Brady, Ignatius C. – “The ‘Declaratio seu Retractatio’ of William of Vaurouillon” in Archivum Franciscanum Historicum 58, pp. 394-416
There are 17 amendments of book 1, 11 of book 2, 6 of book 3 and 5 of book 4.
John of Capestrano – Commentary on the Four Books of the Sentences of Peter Lombard ()
Capestrano (1386–1456) was a Franciscan friar and priest from the Italian town of Capestrano, Abruzzo. Famous as a preacher, theologian, and inquisitor, he earned himself the nickname “the Soldier Saint” when in 1456 at age 70 he led a Crusade against the invading Ottoman Empire at the siege of Belgrade with the Hungarian military commander John Hunyadi.
Henricus of Werl – Commentary Selections
Heinrich (c. 1400 – 1463) was a provincial of the Franciscans, a professor of theology at the University of Cologne and a participant in the Council of Basel in the 1430’s. Henry was considered the third great preacher of his time, along with Johann von Werden and Johann von Minden.
Ruchrat von Wesel, Johann – Commentaries on Books 1-3 of the Sentences of Peter Lombard (manuscript)
Ruchrat (1425-1481) was a German Scholastic theologian. He objected to the system of indulgences and has been called a “reformer before the Reformation”. He appears to have been one of the leaders of the humanist movement in Germany, and to have had some intercourse and sympathy with the leaders of the Hussites in Bohemia.
Erfurt was in his day the headquarters of a humanism which was both devout and opposed to the realist metaphysics and the Thomist theology which prevailed in the universities of Cologne and Heidelberg. Wesel was one of the professors at Erfurt between 1445 and 1456, and was vice-rector in 1458.
He is said to have mastered the formal principle of Protestantism, that scripture is the sole rule of faith; he denied the infallibility of the church, on the ground that the church contains within it sinners as well as saints; he insisted that papal authority could be upheld only when the pope remained true to the evangel; and he held that a sharp distinction ought to be drawn between ecclesiastical sentences and punishments, and the judgments of God. Wesel also held that God chooses some people to salvation, and believed in a church invisible. The best account of Wesel is to be found in K. Ullmann’s Reformers before the Reformation.
Biel, Gabriel – Collections around the Four Books of the Sentences, vol. 1 (bk. 1), 2 (bk. 2), 3 (bk. 3), 4 (bk. 4, dist. 1-14), 5 (bk. 4, dist. 15-22), 6 (Indices) eds. Werbeck & Hofmann (Tubingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1973-) ToC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Biel (1420 to 1425 – 1495) was a German scholastic philosopher and member of the Canons Regular of the Congregation of Windesheim, who were the clerical counterpart to the Brethren of the Common Life. Because of his reliance on the scholastic tradition, as well as William of Ockham’s nominalist views, he is often credited as being an “articulate spokesman of the via moderna and… a discerning user of the thought of via antiqua” (Oberman).
His second and most important work is a commentary on the Sentences of Peter Lombard, which would come to play a major influence on Martin Luther. The historian Janssen declares that he was one of the few Nominalists who erected a theological system without incurring the charge of unorthodoxy.
Lambertus of Monte – Commentary on the Books of the Sentences Selections
Lambertus (c. 1430/5–1499) was a medieval scholastic and Thomist.
1500’s
Mair, John – Four Books of Sentences (Paris, 1509) ToC
Mair (1467–1550), or John Major, was a Scottish philosopher, theologian, and historian who was much admired in his day and was an acknowledged influence on all the great thinkers of the time. A renowned teacher, his works were much collected and frequently republished across Europe. His “sane conservatism” and his skeptical, logical approach to the study of texts such as Aristotle or the Bible were less prized in the subsequent age of humanism, when a more committed and linguistic/literary approach prevailed.
His influence in logic (especially the analysis of terms), science (impetus and infinitesimals), politics (placing the people over kings), Church (councils over Popes), and international law (establishing the human rights of “savages” conquered by the Spanish) can be traced across the centuries and appear decidedly modern.
His approach largely followed Nominalism. His humanist approach was in tune with the return to the texts in the original languages of the Scriptures and classical authors. His influence extended through enthusiastic pupils to the leading thinkers of the day but most obviously to a group of Spanish thinkers, including Antonio Coronel, who taught John Calvin and very probably Ignatius of Loyola. In 1522, at Salamanca, Domingo de San Juan referred to him as “the revered master, John Mair, a man celebrated the world over”.
One of his most notable students was John Knox, who said of Major that he was such as “whose work was then held as an oracle on the matters of religion.” It is not hard to see in Knox’s preaching an intense version of Major’s enthusiasms – the utter freedom of God, the importance of the Bible, skepticism of earthly authority. Major preferred to follow his friend Erasmus’s example and remain within the Romanist Church (though he did envisage a national church for Scotland). Major also filled with enthusiasm other Scottish Reformers including the Protestant martyr Patrick Hamilton and the Latin stylist George Buchanan.
According to Alexander Broadie, Major’s influence of Nominalism continuing into Empiricism reached as far as the 18th and 19th century Scottish School of Common Sense initiated by Thomas Reid.
Lychetus, Franciscus – Commentarius in Commentarium in Libros Sententiarum Scoti Selections
Lichetto (fl. 1520) was a minister-general of the Franciscans.
van Utrecht, Adriaan – Questions on the Fourth of the Sentences, especially around the Sacraments (Jodocus Badius,1516) 176 fol. ToC
Pope Adriaan VI (1459-1523) was Pope from 1522 until his death the next year. The only Dutchman to become pope, he was the last non-Italian pope until the Polish John Paul II 455 years later.
Cortese, Paolo – Four Books of Sentences (Basel: Petrus, 1540) 116 pp. Index After this work in the volume is a book by Savonarola.
Cortese (1465–1510) was a Renaissance humanist from Rome. He is known for his Ciceronianism, his dispute over literary style with Angelo Poliziano in 1485 and his treatise on the cardinalate, De cardinalatu.
Aegidius of Viterbo
Nodes, Daniel – Giles of Viterbo. The Commentary on the Sentences of Petrus Lombardus Pre (Brill: 2010) 550 pp. ToC
Aegidius (b. 1469 to 1472 – d. 1532) was a humanist and general of the Augustinian Order, and a cardinal.
Eck, Johann – Annotations on the First Book of the Sentences (1542; Brill, 1976) 155 pp. ToC
Eck (1486–1543) was a German, Romanist theologian, scholastic, prelate and a pioneer of the counter-reformation who was among Luther’s most important interlocutors and theological opponents.
De Soto, Domingo – Commentaries on the Fourth Book of the Sentences, vol. 1 (dist. 1-23), 2 (24-50) (Benedict Boyerius, 1560 / 1581) ToC 1, 2
De Soto (1494–1560) was a Spanish Dominican priest and scholastic theologian. He is best known as one of the founders of international law and of the Spanish Thomistic philosophical and theological movement known as the School of Salamanca.
Angles Valentino, Jose – Flowers of Theological Questions on the Four Books of the Sentences, vol. 1, 2 (1580; Venice: Damian Zenarius, 1586) ToC 1, 2 Index
Angles (d. 1588) was a Franciscan professor of theology.
1600’s
Estius, Guillelmus – Commentary on the Four Books of the Sentences, bk. 1, 2, 3, 4 (d. 1613; Paris, 1680 / 1696) ToC 1, 2, 3, 4
Estius (1542–1613) was a Dutch, Romanist commentator on the Pauline epistles.
Francisco of Herrera – A Manual of Theology & Most Resolving Explanation of the Principal Questions which are commonly disputed in the four books of sentences, with the principal, fundamental opinions of the most subtle doctor Duns Scotus and the angelic doctor Thomas… (Rome, 1607) 247 pp. ToC
Francisco (1576–1656) was a distinguished Spanish painter, born in Seville. He was the founder of the Seville school.
Mastrius, Bartolomeo – Disputations on the Four Books of Sentences… the Scotist Theology being Vindicated, bk. 1, 2, 3, 4 new ed. (d. 1673; Venice, 1731) ToC 1, 2, 3, 4 Index 1, 2, 3, 4
Mastrius (1602–1673) was an Italian Conventual Franciscan philosopher and theologian. He was deeply versed in the writings of Duns Scotus.
Brancati di Lauria, Francesco Lorenzo – Commentaries on the Sentences of Master John Duns Scotus (Rome: Corbellett, 1653-1682)
bk. 3
pt. 1 Incarnation ToC Syllabus of Notable Things
pt. 2 Faith & its Propagation
pt. 3
bk. 4
pt. 1 Baptism & Eucharist
pt. 2
pt. 3
pt. 4 Last Things
Brancati (1612-1693) was an Italian cardinal and theologian.
Protestant
1500’s
Luther, Martin – Commentary on the Sentences of Peter Lombard in D. Martin Luthers Werke (1510-1511; Weimar: Hermann Bohlau, 1893), vol. 9, pp. 28-94 Prefatory material is in German; the work is in Latin.
Luther (1483-1546), a German, composed this commentary in becoming a doctor, as was the standard requirement at the time. Luther would later be a protestant reformer, post-1517.
.
bk. 1
1. 30
2. 31
3. 33
4. 34
5. 34
6. 36
7. 37
8. 38
9. 38
10. 39
11. 40
12. 40
13. 40
14. 40
15. 40
16. 41
17. 42
18. 44
19. 45
20. 45
21. 46
22. 47
23. 47
24. 48
25. 48
26. 48
27. 49
28. 49
29. 50
30. 50
31. 50
32. 51
33. 53
34. 54
35. 55
36. 55
37. 56
38. 57
39. 59
40. 59
41. 59
42. 59
43. 60
[44 not present]
45. 60
46. 60
47. 61
48. 61
bk. 2
1. 61
2. 61
3. 62
[4-6 not present]
7. 62
8. 62
9. 63
10. 63
11. 63
12. 65
13. 65
14. 66
15. 66
16. 67
17. 67
18. 68
19. 68
20. 68
21. 68
22. 69
23. 69
24. 69
25. 70
26. 70
27. 72
28. 72
[29 not present]
30. 73
31. 74
32. 75
33. 77
34. 77
35. 77
36. 77
[37 not present]
38. 78
39. 79
40. 79
41. 80
42. 81
43. 81
44. 82
bk. 3
[1 not present]
2. 83
3. 83
4. 84
5. 84
6. 85
7. 86
[8-9 present]
10. 87
[11 not present]
12. 87
13. 88
14. 88
15. 88
16. 89
[17-18 not present]
19. 89
20. 89
21. 89
22. 90
23. 90
24. 92
25. 92
[26-29 not present]
30. 93
[31-33 not present]
34. 93
[35-38 not present]
39. 93
bk. 4
44. 94
.
Daneau, Lambert – A Threefold Commentary on the First Book of the Sentences of Peter Lombard, which is on the True God… (Geneva: Eustathius Vignon, 1580) ToC Index The first few chapters discuss the rise and place of scholastic theology. Appended is a list of four distinctive positions of Lombard that were not commonly held. Also appended is A Synopsis of the Healthy & Old Doctrine of the Sacred Trinity Collected out of the Orthodox Creeds & Old Synods, & yet Opposite the First Book of Peter Lombard’s Sentences.
Daneau (c. 1530 – c. 1590) was a French jurist and reformed theologian, who taught for a time in Leiden and other places. Manetsch describes Daneau as a “champion of Calvinist orthodoxy, with the expansive vision of expanding and extending the domains of secular knowledge… on the basis of Scripture through the use of the scholastic method of dialectic.” Daneau wrote on many subjects, including a political treatise justifying armed resistance against tyranny. He also wrote on witchcraft. His Physica christiana (1576) argued for a Scriptural basis for physics. It was translated by Twyne as The Wonderfull Workmanship of the World (1578).
.
Prologue
1. Of the first origin of scholastic theology
2. Of the progression of scholastic doctrine and the threefold era of the same, and the difference
3. Of those which are called eclogues and theological sums, and when they first began to be collected: first the decrees, then the sums
4. Of Peter Lombard, who is called the master of the Sentences, and of the various interpreters of these books
5. What and how much the authority ought to be of these four books amongst Christian men
6. Those things which are customarily brought forth for inspecting the writings of Peter Lombard, and a brief response to them
Prologue of Lombard 1
Scholia 3
1. Enjoyment & Use
Lombard 4
1.. Every doctrine is of things or signs 12
2. Of things which are to be enjoyed or to be used, and of these which are to be enjoyed and used 13
8. Whether to use or to enjoy may be virtues 20
Censure 21
2. Divine Essence’s Unity
Lombard 24
1. Of the mystery of the trinity and unity 33
4. Testimonies of the saints on the Trinity 34
5. Neither solitude, nor diversity, nor singularity, but similitude 35
6. Other authorities are put forth 38
Censure 40
3. Knowledge of the Creator through the Created
Lombard 42
1. 55
3. 57
5. 58
14. 59
18. 60
19. 61
Censure 62
4. Divine Generation & Divine Predication
Lombard 70
1. 74
3. 74
Censure 77
5. Whether the Divine Essence Generates
Lombard 79
1. 90
3. 91
4. 93
6. 95
7. 97
8. 99
9. 100
Censure 104
6. Principle of the Son’s Generation
Lombard 108
Inscription 111
3. 112
Censure 115
7. Commonness of the Generative Principle
Lombard 119
1. 124
Censure 125
8. Divine Essence
Lombard 131
Inscription 140
1. 140
2. 143
3. 147
5. 151
9. 153
Censure 156
9. Generation of the Son
Lombard 160
1. 169
3. 169
4. 169
6. 169
8. 170
9. 170
10. 171
11. 173
13. 174
14. 175
15. 177
Censure 178
10. Procession of the Spirit
Lombard 184
2. 189
7. 190
9. 193
Censure 193
11. Procession of Spirit from Father & Son
Lombard 197
3. 201
5. 202
Censure 202
12. Order between Father & Son regarding Procession of Spirit
Lombard 207
2. 212
3. 212
Censure 214
13. Procession of Spirit in comparison to Generation of Son
Lombard 218
1. 223
2. 224
3. 224
Censure 225
14. Temporal Procession of Spirit
Lombard 227
2. 233
3. 233
6. 236
Censure 237
15. Sending the Spirit
Lombard 241
3. 250
4. 250
5. 252
11. 252
Censure 253
16. Visible Sending of the Spirit
Lombard 257
2. 261
3. 262
4. 263
Censure 263
17. Invisible Sending of the Spirit
Lombard 267
2. 281
3. 283
4. 286
5. 287
6. 289
10. 289
11. 290
17. 291
18. 291
19. 293
Censure 294
18. Holy Spirit as Gift
Lombard 300
4. 308
6. 309
7. 310
Censure 310
19. Equality of Divine Persons
Lombard 314
1. 329
2. 330
5. 334
7. 336
8. 337
Censure 337
20. Equality in Power
Lombard 345
2. 349
3. 349
5. 349
6. 350
Censure 350
21. Exclusive Diction in the Divine
Lombard 355
1. 359
2. 360
4. 360
Censure 361
22. Names Designating the Divine Essence & Persons
Lombard 365
1. 369
5. 370
Censure 370
23. On the name ‘Person’
Lombard 375
3. 383
4. 383
7. 384
9. 385
10. 388
Censure 388
24. Names signifying Unity & Plurality in the Divine
Lombard 394
3. 398
5. 400
8. 401
10. 401
Censure 402
25. Signification of ‘Person’ in the Plural
Lombard 408
2. 417
3. 419
4. 419
5. 420
8. 422
12. 422
Censure 424
26. Personal Properties
Lombard 427
1. 436
2. 437
3. 438
4. 439
5. 441
6. 441
Censure 442
27. Properties themselves in their Connection with the Person’s Names
Lombard 445
2. 452
3. 453
4. 454
5. 456
Censure 456
28. Non-Personal Notions
Lombard 462
1. 469
3. 471
4. 472
5. 473
6. 473
7. 474
Censure 474
29. Common Spiration
Lombard 479
1. 484
3. 486
Censure 487
30. Names said from the Time
Lombard 491
1. 495
2. 495
Censure 495
31. Divine Appropriations
Lombard 498
1. 507
3. 509
4. 511
5. 512
9. 512
Censure 513
32. Comparison of the Persons
Lombard 517
1. 525
2. 526
3. 526
Censure 527
33. Relation of Person, Essence & their Properties
Lombard 530
1. 538
3. 539
4. 542
5. 542
8. 543
Censure 544
34. Persons in Comparison to the Divine Essence
Lombard 548
1. 558
4. 560
9. 561
Censure 561
35. God’s Knowledge
Lombard 563
5. 569
Censure 570
36. How the Realities that God Knows are in Him
Lombard 574
1. 580
4. 580
5. 582
6. 583
Censure 583
37. How God is in Realities
Lombard 587
1. 601
2. 604
3. 605
4. 605
5. 606
7. 606
8. 606
9. 606
14. 607
Censure 609
38. On the Causality & Ineffability of the Divine Knowledge
Lombard 613
1. 619
3. 620
4. 620
Censure 621
39. How God’s Knowledge is a Cause
Lombard 625
1. 630
2. 632
4. 633
Censure 633
40. Predestination
Lombard 638
1. 643
2. 643
3. 645
4. 647
Censure 651
41. Causality of Predestination
Lombard 656
1. 663
2. 664
3. 665
Censure 665
42. God’s Power
Lombard 670
1. 675
3. 676
4. 676
6. 677
8. 678
Censure 678
43. Limitlessness of the Divine Power
Lombard 683
3. 689
5. 690
Censure 691
44. God’s Power Limited to the Quality of Things?
45. God’s Will
Lombard 702
4. 709
5. 711
6. 713
7. 714
Censure 715
46. Evil & the Efficacy of the Divine Will
Lombard 720
2. 731
3. 732
5. 733
6. 733
7. 735
9. 736
10. 737
12. 737
14. 738
Censure 738
47. Efficacy of the Divine Will
Lombard 741
1. 745
2. 746
Censure 747
48. Conformity of our Will to the Divine Will
Lombard 748
2. 753
3. 754
5. 754
Censure 755-57
Articles of Lombard Not Commonly from All
Index
Synopsis of the Healthy & Old Doctrine of the Trinity out of the Orthodox Symbols and Ancient Synods Collected, yet Opposite to the first book of Lombard’s Sentences (1580) 23 pp.
.
.
On Peter Lombard & his Context (c. 1096 – 1160)
Articles
‘Peter Lombard’ at Catholic Encyclopedia
‘Peter Lombard’ at Encyclopedia Britannica
Hoffecker, Andrew – ‘Peter Lombard, Master of the Sentences’ (2012) 8 paragraphs at Ligonier
‘Peter Lombard’ at Wikipedia
.
Books
1900’s
Benham, Canon – The Letters of Peter Lombard (London: MacMillan, 1912) 300 pp. ToC
Rogers, Elizabeth F. – Peter Lombard & the Sacramental System (Merrick, NY: Richwood Pub. Co., 1976) 250 pp. ToC
Colish, Marcia L. – Peter Lombard, vol. 1, 2 (Brill, 1994) ToC
.
2000’s
Rosemann, Philipp W. – Peter Lombard (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004) 280 pp. ToC
See a review.
ed. Giraud, Cedric – A Companion to Twelfth-Century Schools Pre (Brill, 2020) 315 pp. ToC
.
On the Theology of Peter Lombard
Book
2000’s
Monagle, Clare – Orthodoxy & Controversy in Twelfth-Century Religious Discourse: Peter Lombards ‘Sentences’ & the Development of Theology Abstract (Brepols, 2013) 194 pp.
“This is the first book to look closely at the contested reception of Peter Lombard’s Sentences and its eventual triumph at the Fourth Lateran Council [AD 1215]. By placing Peter Lombard’s career and works within the broader frame of twelfth-century ideas, practice, and institutions, the author explores and contextualizes the controversies that attended the publication of the Sentences. At the same time, she also traces the growing popularity of the Sentences and its increasing prestige and importance among the literary elites of Northern Europe.” – Blurb
Tkachenko, Rostislav – Peter Lombard’s Philosophical Theology Proper PhD diss. (National Pedagogical Dragomanov University, Kyiv, Ukraine, 2019) After some initial pages in Russian(?), the dissertation is in English.
“The present research examines the philosophical theology and, specifically, the theology of divine attributes of a key medieval theologian Peter Lombard in his textbook of dogmatic theology, the Book of Sentences.”
.
.
On Lombard’s Sentences
Books
1900’s
Rogers, Elizabeth F. – Peter Lombard & the Sacramental System (Merrick, NY: Richwood Pub. Co., 1976) 250 pp. ToC
This includes a translation of the first half of book 4 of the Sentences.
Colish, Marcia L. – Peter Lombard, vol. 1, 2 (Brill, 1994) ToC
Much of this work is on the Sentences.
.
2000’s
Rosemann, Philipp W.
Peter Lombard (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004) 280 pp. ToC
See a review. Most of this work is about Lombard’s Sentences.
The Story of a Great Medieval Book: Peter Lombard’s “Sentences” Pre (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2007) 200 pp. ToC
.
.
On the Commentaries on Lombard’s Sentences
Background
Book
2000’s
Young, Spencer E. – Scholarly Community at the Early University of Paris: Theologians, Education & Society, 1215-1248 Pre (Cambridge, 2014) 250 pp. ToC
.
On the Commentaries Generally
Books
2000’s
ed. Rosemann, Philipp W. – Medieval Commentaries on the Sentences of Peter Lombard, 3 vols. Ref 1 Pre 2, 3 (Brill, 2015) ToC 1, 2, 3
eds. Brinzel, Monica & Christopher Schabel – Philosophical Psychology in Late-Medieval Commentaries on Peter Lombard’s Sentences Ref (Brepols, 2020) 445 pp.
“The proceedings of the SIEPM Colloquium at Nijmegen published in this volume bring together new evidence for how the corpus of late-medieval commentaries on the Sentences, especially from the second half of the fourteenth century, contributed to the development of philosophical psychology within the discipline of theology. The relation among the faculties of the soul, the limits of knowledge, hylomorphism and the union of soul and body, intuitive and abstractive cognition, the immortality of the soul, the experience of the beatific vision, divine foreknowledge and the knowability of species are some of the topics involving psychological issues that are examined…
The wealth of new information presented in this volume results from the interpretation of previously unexplored sources… Peter Lombard’s Sentences… provided lecturers and commentators with a variety of loci for the discussion of philosophical topics, from the principia (Denys of Montina), the Prologue (Alfonsus Vargas of Toledo, Hugolino of Orvieto, John Regis, Francis Toti of Perugia), Book I (Gregory of Rimini, John of Mirecourt, Pierre Ceffons, Hugolino of Orvieto, Pierre d’Ailly, Peter of Candia, the Vienna Group, John Capreolus, Henry of Gorkum, Denys the Carthusian), Book II (Pierre Ceffons, Peter of Candia, Guillaume de Vaurouillon, Gabriel Biel, Denys the Carthusian), and Book III (Heymericus de Campo).” – Blurb
eds. Brinzei, Monica & William O. Duba – Principia on the Sentences of Peter Lombard: Exploring an Uncharted Scholastic Philosophical Genre Across Europe, 2 vols. in Studia Sententiarum, vol. 7 Abstract (Brepols, 2024) ToC
Abstract: “Principia were an obligatory step on the medieval university path to becoming a master of theology. As inaugural lectures on the four books of the Sentences of Peter Lombard, they provided the first opportunity for a scholastic to defend a philosophical-theological worldview. These lectures were also a way for the theologian, now a sententiarius, to present himself and to make a name for himself… The present book takes a collective approach to offer a survey of the evolution of the genre, mapping the dissemination of this exercise during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries across Europe.”
.
On Specific Commentaries
Alexander of Hales
Books
2000’s
Wass, Meldon – The Infinite God & the Summa Fratris Alexandri (Quincy College Publications, 1964) 110 pp. ToC
Schumacher, Lydia – The Summa Halensis: Sources & Context Pre (De Gruyter, 2020) ToC
This is on Alexander of Hales’s commentary on Lombard’s Sentences, which was the first major commentary thereon.
For something concise on Hales’s commentary, see ‘Alexander of Hales: Summa Universae Theologiae‘ at Wikipedia.
.
.
.
Related Pages