-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
/
ahsh-l2Bi3t2s1q2t3c1.xml
160 lines (160 loc) · 9.46 KB
/
ahsh-l2Bi3t2s1q2t3c1.xml
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0">
<teiHeader>
<fileDesc>
<titleStmt>
<title>IIa-IIae, Inq. 3, Tract. 2, S. 1, Q. 2, T. 3, C. 1</title>
<author ref="#AlexanderOfHales">Alexander of Hales</author>
<respStmt>
<name xml:id="JW">Jeffrey C. Witt</name>
<resp>TEI encoder</resp>
</respStmt>
</titleStmt>
<editionStmt>
<edition n="0.0.0-dev">
<title>IIa-IIae, Inq. 3, Tract. 2, S. 1, Q. 2, T. 3, C. 1</title>
<date when="2017-08-19">August 19, 2017</date>
</edition>
</editionStmt>
<publicationStmt>
<authority><ref target="https://www.earlyfranciscans.com">ERC Project 714427: Authority and Innovation in Early Franciscan Thought</ref></authority>
<availability status="free">
<p>Published under a <ref target="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0">Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International</ref>
</p>
</availability>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc>
<listWit>
<witness xml:id="Qc" n="quaracchi1930">Quaracchi 1930</witness>
</listWit>
</sourceDesc>
</fileDesc>
<encodingDesc>
<schemaRef n="lbp-critical-1.0.0" url="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/lombardpress/lombardpress-schema/master/src/out/critical.rng"/>
<editorialDecl>
<p>Encoding of this text has followed the recommendations of the LombardPress 1.0.0
guidelines for a critical edition.</p>
</editorialDecl>
</encodingDesc>
<revisionDesc status="draft">
<listChange>
<change when="2017-08-19" status="draft" n="0.0.0">
<p>Created file for the first time.</p>
</change>
</listChange>
</revisionDesc>
</teiHeader>
<text xml:lang="la">
<front>
<div xml:id="starts-on"/>
</front>
<body>
<div xml:id="ahsh-l2Bi3t2s1q2t3c1">
<head xml:id="ahsh-l2Bi3t2s1q2t3c1-Hd1e100">IIa-IIae, Inq. 3, Tract. 2, S. 1, Q. 2, T. 3, C. 1</head>
<head xml:id="ahsh-l2Bi3t2s1q2t3c1-Hd1e103" type="question-title">UTRUM NEGLIGENTIA SIT PECCATUM<!--2-->.</head>
<p xml:id="ahsh-l2Bi3t2s1q2t3c1-d1e106">
<lb ed="#Qc"/>Ad primum sic: 1. Diligentia et<!--v--> negligentia sunt
<lb ed="#Qc"/>opposita, quoniam aliquis dicitur diligens in
<lb ed="#Qc"/>bono opere, quando est ei curae<!--x--> quando et quo
<lb ed="#Qc"/>modo et ubi faciat opus suum; per oppositum huius
<cb ed="#Qc" n="b"/>
<lb ed="#Qc"/>dicitur negligentia; sed diligentia non est virtus,
<lb ed="#Qc"/>immo dispositio concomitans<!--y--> virtutem, circuiens
<lb ed="#Qc"/>omnes virtutes; ergo similiter negligentia non
<lb ed="#Qc"/>erit peccatum, immo erit dispositio, quae est
<pb ed="#Qc" n="343"/>
<cb ed="#Qc" n="a"/>
<lb ed="#Qc"/>comes; negligentia ergo non<!--a--> est peccatum, sed
<lb ed="#Qc"/>circumstantia peccati sive dispositio concomitans
<lb ed="#Qc"/>peccatum.
</p>
<p xml:id="ahsh-l2Bi3t2s1q2t3c1-d1e139">
<lb ed="#Qc"/>2. Item, Philosophus<!--1--> dicit quod <foreign xml:lang="gr">προᾶιρεσις</foreign>
<lb ed="#Qc"/>idem est quod eligentia; sed eligentia<!--b--> recta
<lb ed="#Qc"/>opponitur negligentiae, quoniam negligere est non
<lb ed="#Qc"/>eligere: unde est privatio ipsius eligentiae<!--c-->; sed,
<lb ed="#Qc"/>secundum <name>Philosophum</name><!--2-->, eligentia non est vir<lb ed="#Qc"/>tus,
sed principium virtutis consuetudinalis sive
<lb ed="#Qc"/>moralis<!--d-->; ergo per oppositum ipsa negligentia,
<lb ed="#Qc"/>quae est eius<!--e--> privatio, non est peccatum, sed
<lb ed="#Qc"/>comes peccati, sicut nec eligentia virtus<!--f-->, sed
<lb ed="#Qc"/>comes virtutis.
</p>
<p xml:id="ahsh-l2Bi3t2s1q2t3c1-d1e163">
<lb ed="#Qc"/>Ad oppositum. a. <title>Ierem.</title> 48, 10, dicitur: <quote xml:id="ahsh-l2Bi3t2s1q2t3c1-Qd1e167" source="http://scta.info/resource/ier48_10">Male<lb ed="#Qc"/>dictus
homo, qui facit opus Dei negligenter</quote>. Sed
<lb ed="#Qc"/>maledictio non datur nisi ratione peccati, secun<lb ed="#Qc"/>dum
interpretationem Scripturae; et constat quod
<lb ed="#Qc"/>non datur haec maledictio ratione operis Dei,
<lb ed="#Qc"/>quoniam facere opus Dei non est peccatum; ergo
<lb ed="#Qc"/>datur haec maledictio ratione eius quod est facere
<lb ed="#Qc"/>negligenter<!--g-->; ergo negligentia est peccatum.
</p>
<p xml:id="ahsh-l2Bi3t2s1q2t3c1-d1e187">
<lb ed="#Qc"/>b. Item, <name>Hieronymus</name><!--3-->: <quote xml:id="ahsh-l2Bi3t2s1q2t3c1-Qd1e191">Qui claudam et
<lb ed="#Qc"/>quasi sorde maculatam offert hostiam, reus est
<lb ed="#Qc"/>sacrilegii; quanto magis qui partem sui corporis
<lb ed="#Qc"/>et illibatae animae puritatem amplexibus Regis
<lb ed="#Qc"/>parat, si negligens fuerit, punietur</quote>. Non autem
<lb ed="#Qc"/>punitur nisi peccatum; ergo, si punitur quia ne<lb ed="#Qc"/>gligens
fuerit, patet quod negligentia erit pec<lb ed="#Qc"/>catum.
</p>
<p xml:id="ahsh-l2Bi3t2s1q2t3c1-d1e209">
<lb ed="#Qc"/>Respondeo<!--h-->: 1. Ad primum dicendum quod
<lb ed="#Qc"/>diligentia<!--i--> aliquando nominat dispositionem con<lb ed="#Qc"/>comitantem
virtutes generaliter, aliquando autem
<lb ed="#Qc"/>nominat virtutem, ut cum dicitur: <quote xml:id="ahsh-l2Bi3t2s1q2t3c1-Qd1e219" source="http://scta.info/resource/prov12_4">Mulier dili<lb ed="#Qc"/>gens
corona est viro</quote>, <title>Prov.</title> 12, 4. Nam diligentia
<lb ed="#Qc"/>quamdam dicit et importat sollicitudinem; sed po<lb ed="#Qc"/>test
dicere sollicitudinem ex parte ipsius rationis
<lb ed="#Qc"/>vel intellectus vel ex parte voluntatis, sicut cum
<lb ed="#Qc"/>dicimus<!--k--> <mentioned>homo diligit esse sollicitus circa bo<lb ed="#Qc"/>num</mentioned>.
Secundum quod dicit sollicitudinem ex
<lb ed="#Qc"/>parte voluntatis ad bonum, sic<!--l--> diligentia est
<cb ed="#Qc" n="b"/>
<lb ed="#Qc"/>virtus, et hoc modo negligentia<!--m-->, ei opposita, est
<lb ed="#Qc"/>ex parte voluntatis similiter prout diligit anima
<lb ed="#Qc"/>non esse sollicita ad bonum, et haec negligentia
<lb ed="#Qc"/>est peccatum. Si autem dicat diligentia sollicitu<lb ed="#Qc"/>dinem
ex parte rationis vel intellectus, hoc modo
<lb ed="#Qc"/>non est virtus, sed comes virtutis; unde hoc modo
<lb ed="#Qc"/>disparatur sive separatur a virtute, sicut scien<lb ed="#Qc"/>tia<!--n-->
disparatur a virtute: et hoc modo similiter
<lb ed="#Qc"/>negligentia, ei opposita, non est peccatum, immo
<lb ed="#Qc"/>comes vel dispositio peccati. Unde, sicut dicimus
<lb ed="#Qc"/>quod ignorantia<!--o-->, prout est in ratione, non est
<lb ed="#Qc"/>peccatum, immo poena peccati, prout autem est
<lb ed="#Qc"/>in voluntate, sic est peccatum, scilicet<!--p--> prout
<lb ed="#Qc"/>dicimus de aliquo quod ipse vult ignorare, quia
<lb ed="#Qc"/>hoc modo ipsa est peccatum — unde ad <title>Rom.</title> 2, 4,
<lb ed="#Qc"/>super illud: <quote xml:id="ahsh-l2Bi3t2s1q2t3c1-Qd1e274" source="http://scta.info/resource/rom2_4">Ignoras quoniam benignitas Dei ad
<lb ed="#Qc"/>paenitentiam te<!--q--> adducit?</quote> dicit <title>Glossa</title><!--4-->: <quote xml:id="ahsh-l2Bi3t2s1q2t3c1-Qd1e280" source="http://scta.info/resource/gom-rom2-d1e193">Gra<lb ed="#Qc"/>vissime
peccas, quia ignoras te contemnere</quote> -
<lb ed="#Qc"/>sic dicendum est de negligentia quod<!--r--> negligentia,
<lb ed="#Qc"/>prout est in ratione vel intellectu, non est pec<lb ed="#Qc"/>catum,
immo magis comes sive<!--s--> dispositio quae<lb ed="#Qc"/>dam
vel poena ex peccato; sed secundum quod
<lb ed="#Qc"/>est in voluntate, peccatum est, hoc est secun<lb ed="#Qc"/>dum
quod est detectus illius sollicitudinis vel
<lb ed="#Qc"/>attentionis in<!--t--> voluntate, quam nominat diligen<lb ed="#Qc"/>tia
virtus; secundum<!--u--> quod est defectus sollici<lb ed="#Qc"/>tudinis
illius in ratione, non.
</p>
<p xml:id="ahsh-l2Bi3t2s1q2t3c1-d1e305">
<lb ed="#Qc"/>2. Ad secundam rationem, qua obicitur de
<lb ed="#Qc"/>eligentia, similiter dicendum est quod eligentia<!--v-->,
<lb ed="#Qc"/>prout est rationis, sicut<!--x--> non est virtus, sed comes
<lb ed="#Qc"/>virtutis, sic negligentia, opposita eligentiae, co<lb ed="#Qc"/>mes
est peccati. — Vel potest dici eligentia ipsa
<lb ed="#Qc"/>voluntas eligendi bonum et repellendi malum,
<lb ed="#Qc"/>et haec est in voluntate, et haec est virtus: et
<lb ed="#Qc"/>per oppositum negligentia, ipsi opposita, dicitur
<lb ed="#Qc"/>esse peccatum, et haec negligentia dicitur<!--y--> vo<lb ed="#Qc"/>luntas
eligendi malum et repellendi bonum: haec
<lb ed="#Qc"/>enim est peccatum, et hoc<!--z--> est negligentia. Unde
<lb ed="#Qc"/>patet quod negligentia, secundum quod est op<lb ed="#Qc"/>posita
eligentiae virtuti, dicitur esse peccatum.
</p>
</div>
</body>
</text>
</TEI>