The Ordinatio of John Duns Scotus :: Ordinatio. Book 4. Distinctions 1

Export a Citation collapse section

Print View

hide main text

just this volume

Ordinatio. Book 4. Distinctions 1 - 7

Collapse All | Expand All

book four. distinctions 1 - 7

prologue

first distinction. overview of the parts of the distinction

first distinction. first part. on the action of the creature in respect of the term of creation

single question. whether a creature can have any action with respect to the term of creation

I. opinion of the theologians, who hold to the negative side of the question

a. the four reasons they bring forward

1. first reason, which is from thomas aquinas

2. second reason

3. third reason

4. fourth reason

b. the inefficacy of the aforesaid reasons

1. about the first reason

2. about the second reason

3. about the third reason

4. about the fourth reason

II. opinion of avicenna for the opposite side of the question

a. exposition of the opinion

b. refutation of the opinion

1. the reason proposed by thomas aquinas.

2. scotus’ own argument, drawn from three propositions

a. the first proposition

b. the second proposition

c. the third proposition

C. to the arguments for the opinion

III. response to the question

a. on the sense of the expressions ‘to act initially’ and ‘to act instrumentally’

b. what one must think when ‘to act initially’ is taken

1. nothing other than god can, independently of a superior cause, act or create initially

2. whether any creature can act or create when depending on a superior cause

a. the first way of speaking

b. the second way of speaking

c. the third way of speaking

d. final opinion

e. an objection and its solution

f. a doubt and its solution

C. what one must think about ‘to act instrumentally’

D. about the opinion of peter lombard

IV. to the initial arguments

first distinction. second part. on the proper idea of a sacrament and on its institution

question one. whether the idea definitive of a sacrament is what the master posits: ‘a sacrament is the visible form of an invisible grace’

I. to the question

a. what there can and cannot be a definition of

b. whether there can be a definition of a sacrament

1. about a definition’s first condition

2. about a definition’s second condition

3. about a definition’s third condition

4. about a definition’s fourth and fifth condition

5. conclusion

C. what the fitting definition of a sacrament is

D. solution of the question

II. to the initial arguments

question two. whether for the period of any law given by god some sacrament needed to have been instituted

I. to the question

a. some sacrament did need to be instituted

b. by whom a sacrament needs to be instituted

C. when or for what period there was need for a sacrament to be instituted

D. whether different sacraments needed to be instituted

1. how sacraments can be distinguished

2. response to the issue at hand

II. to the initial arguments

first distinction. third part. on the causality of a sacrament as regard conferring grace

question one. whether it is possible for a sacrament, perfect to any extent whatever, to have an active causality with respect to conferring grace

question two. whether it is possible for some supernatural virtue to exist in a sacrament

I. opinion of thomas aquinas about each question

a. exposition of the opinion

1. as to the first question

2. as to the second question

b. rejection of the opinion

1. as to the first question

2. as to the second question

II. opinion of henry of ghent about the first question

a. statement of the opinion

b. rejection of the opinion

III. scotus’ own opinion as to the first question

IV. scotus’ opinion as to the second question

V. to the initial arguments of the first question

VI. the argument of the opinion of thomas

VII. to the initial arguments of the second question

first distinction. incidental fourth part: on circumcision

question one. whether grace was conferred in circumcision by force of the circumcision

I. to the question

a. circumcision removed original sin

b. whether grace was conferred in circumcision

1. whether god can by his absolute power delete original guilt without infusion of grace

a. the opinion of richard of middleton

b. a doubt

2. whether god could do the same by his ordained power

a. opinions of others

b. scotus’ own opinion

II. to the initial arguments

question two. whether during the time of the law of nature there was any sacrament corresponding to circumcision

I. to the question

II. to the initial arguments

second distinction

division of the text

question one. whether the sacraments of the new law get their efficacy from the passion of christ

I. to the question

a. first conclusion

b. second conclusion

C. solution of the question

D. first corollary

e. second corollary

f. third corollary

II. to the initial arguments

question two. whether someone baptized with the baptism of john was necessarily required to be baptized with the baptism of christ

I. to the question

II. to the initial arguments

third distinction

division of the text and overview of the questions

question one. whether the proper definition is what the master posits: ‘baptism is a dipping, that is, an exterior cleansing of the body, done under a prescribed form of words’

I. to the question

a. how baptism can have a definition

b. whether the definition of baptism is the one that the master posits

C. solution of the question

II. to the initial arguments

question two. whether this is the precise form of baptism: ‘i baptize you in the name of the father, and of the son, and of the holy spirit’

I. to the question

a. whether and how certain words could be the form of baptism

b. about the form of baptism needed on the part of the minister

C. about the form necessary on the part of the sacrament

1. about the non-principal words of the form

2. about the principal words of the form

a. about variation in substance

b. about variation in quantity

c. about variation in quantity

d. about variation in ‘where’

II. to the initial arguments

question three. whether pure natural water is the only fitting matter of baptism

I. to the question

II. to the initial arguments

question four. whether the institution of baptism voids circumcision

I. preamble to the question: that baptism was instituted in the new law is true and reasonable

a. it is true

b. it is reasonable

II. solution of the question

a. whether the receiving of baptism was simply necessary

b. whether circumcision was voided by baptism

1. opinion of others

a. exposition of the opinion

b. rejection of the opinion

2. scotus’ own opinion

a. about the times of baptism and circumcision, and of their interconnections

b. about the ways in which peter and paul conducted themselves in the presence of convert jews and gentiles

c. about the definitive revocation of circumcision

3. to the arguments for the opinion of others

III. to the initial arguments

fourth distinction.

division of the text and overview of the parts and questions

fourth distinction. first part. about reception of the sacrament and the thing in children receiving baptism

question one. whether children are to be baptized

I. to the question

II. to the initial arguments

question two. whether baptized children receive the effect of baptism

I. to the question

II. to the initial arguments

question three. whether a child present in the womb of his mother could be baptized

I. to the question

a. opinion of others and rejection of it

b. scotus’ own opinion

II. to the initial arguments

fourth distinction. second part. about reception of the sacrament and not the thing in adults receiving baptism

question one. whether an adult who does not consent can receive the effect of baptism

I. to the question

a. about an adult with the use of reason or without it

1. about an adult who never uses reason

2. about an adult not now using reason

3. about an adult with the use of reason

b. about an adult who is not willing

II. to the initial arguments

question two. whether an adult who is feigning receives the effect of baptism

I. to the question

a. about him who feigns on the outside to be willing, is unwilling on the inside

b. about him who feigns on the outside to be disposed, is not disposed on the inside

1. a person so feigning does not in baptism receive grace but through penance

2. objections to the aforesaid solution

3. response to the first objection

4. response to the second objection

a. objection to this response

b. triple response to the objection

II. to the initial arguments

fourth distinction. third part. about the reception of the thing and not the sacrament both in children and in adults receiving baptism

single question. whether those already justified are bound to the receiving of baptism

I. to the question

II. to the initial arguments

fourth distinction. fourth part. about equal or unequal reception of the thing and not the sacrament, and about conferring baptism in doubtful cases

question one. whether all the baptized receive the effect of baptism equally

I. to the question

a. opinion of others and its rejection

b. scotus’ own opinion

1. about the effect of baptism flowing forth from the principal cause

2. about the effect of baptism flowing forth from the meritorious cause

3. about the effect of baptism flowing forth from the receivers

II. to the initial argument

question two. what is to be done about an exposed child

question three. whether the children of jews and infidels are to be baptized against their parents’ wishes

I. opinion of others and rejection of it

II. scotus’ own opinion

fifth distinction

division of the text and overview of the questions

question one. whether the malice of the minister prevent baptism being conferred

I. to the question

II. to the initial arguments

question two. whether he who receives baptism knowingly from a bad minister sins mortally

I. to the question

a. about reception of baptism from a minister in schism from the church

1. first way: about the obligation to receive baptism

2. second way: about refusal to receive baptism from such a minister

3. the second way is rejected

4. an intermediate opinion

b. about receiving baptism from a bad minister not in schism from the church

II. to the initial arguments

question three. whether one should administer the baptismal sacrament when there is presumption that the baptizing poses a danger to the bodily life of him who receives it

sixth distinction

division of the text and overview of the questions

sixth distinction. first part. about the rank of the minister

single question. whether only a priest can baptize

I. to the question

II. to the initial arguments

second distinction. second part. about the unity of baptism

question one. whether the unity of baptism necessarily requires that it be conferred by one minister

I. to the question

a. about baptism administered by two ministers who together do the whole

b. about baptism administered by two ministers who do something separately

C. about the baptizing of many carried out by one minister all at once

D. about the baptism of a receiver whose unicity is in doubt

II. to the initial arguments

question two. whether the unity of baptism requires the washing and the speaking of the words to be simultaneous

a. the opinion of the glossator

b. rejection of the opinion

C. scotus’ own opinion

II. to the initial arguments

question three. whether the unity of baptism requires the baptizer to be distinct in person from the baptized

I. to the question

II. to the initial argument

sixth distinction. third part. about the intention of the minister

question one. whether in the minister who baptizes there is required the due intention to baptize

I. to the question

a. the common opinion and assessment of it

b. scotus’ own opinion

1. about intention as regard the act

2. about intention as regard the end

a. exposition

b. objections

c. response to the first objection

d. response to the second objection

II. to the initial arguments

question two. what sort of intention is required in the minister who baptizes

I. to the question

II. to the initial arguments

fourth part. about the repetition of baptism

sixth distinction. fourth part. article one. about the illicitness of repeating baptism

question one. whether baptism can be repeated

I. to the question

a. reasons of others against the repeatability of baptism, and rejection of them

b. scotus’ own reason

II. to the initial argument

question two. what the penalty is for those who repeat baptism

sixth distinction. fourth part. article two. about the character because of which baptism is posited as unrepeatable

question one. whether a character is impressed in baptism

I. to the question

a. about the meaning of this name ‘character’

b. about the impressing on the soul of character thus understood

1. first opinion: neither by natural reason nor from things believed can it be proved that a character is present in the soul

f. response to the initial arguments for the opposite

2. second opinion: that there is a character in the soul can be proved by the authority of the church and various elements of congruence

3. to the arguments for the first opinion

a. to the argument about the way of positing a character

b. to the first reason

c. to the second reason

d. to the third reason

e. to the fourth reason

f. to the fifth reason

II. to the initial arguments

question two. whether the character is some absolute form

I. to the question

a. the opinion of thomas aquinas

b. rejection of the opinion

1. against him who holds this opinion from his own statements

2. against the reasons brought forward in the opinion

a. to the first reason

b. to the second reason

c. to the third reason

d. to the fourth reason

e. conclusion

C. two doubts as to the question

1. about the first doubt

2. about the second doubt

D. scotus’ own opinion

e. doubt as to scotus’ own opinion

1. consideration of the diverse opinions or solutions

a. about the first solution

b. about other possible solutions

c. about another peculiar possible solution

2. scotus’ own solution

II. to the initial arguments on both sides

question three. whether character is in the essence of the soul or in some power of it

I. to the question

a. opinion of thomas aquinas

1. exposition of the opinion

2. rejection of the opinion

b. scotus’ own opinion

II. to the initial argument

III. to the reason for thomas aquinas’ position

summation of the distinctions about baptism

on a twofold exhaustive definition of baptism

seventh distinction

division of the text

introduction. about the idea or definition of confirmation

I. statement of the definition

II. explanation of the definition

III. objections against the definition

IV. response to the objections

a. to the first objection

b. to the second objection

C. to the third objection

1. first way of speaking and its rejection

2. second way of speaking and its rejection

3. third way of speaking and its proof by authorities

a. first authority and the weighing of it

b. second authority and the weighing of it

4. fourth way of speaking

question one. whether the sacrament of confirmation is necessary for salvation

I. to the question

II. to the initial argument

question two. whether the sacrament of confirmation is of more dignity than baptism

I. to the question

II. to the initial argument for the other side

question three. whether the sacrament of confirmation could be repeated

I. to the question

II. to the initial argument

question four. whether there is any penalty for those who repeat the sacrament of confirmation

endmatter

footnotes

SUBSCRIBER:

past masters commons

Annotation Guide:

All Collections > The Ordinatio of John Duns Scotus > Ordinatio. Book 4. Distinctions 1 - 7

The Ordinatio of John Duns Scotus

Ordinatio. Book 4. Distinctions 1 - 7

hide table of contents

Go to next volume