Authors/Duns Scotus/Ordinatio/Ordinatio I/Prologus/P3Q1/A3

Translated by Peter Simpson.

Latin	English
Art. 3
151 Ex dictis respondeo ad primam quaestionem. Et primo loquendo de theologia in se quantum ad veritates necessarias ipsius, dico quod primum obiectum theologiae in se non potest esse nisi Deus; quod probo per tres rationes. Prima accipitur ex ratione primi obiecti, et arguo sic: primum obiectum continet virtualiter omnes veritates illius habitus cuius est primum obiectum; nihil continet virtualiter omnes veritates theologicas nisi Deus; ergo etc. - Probatio minoris: nihil aliud continet eas ut causa sive ut illud ad quod habeant attributionem nisi Deus, quia Deus nulli alii attribuitur; nec aliquid continet eas ut effectus demonstratione quia, nam nullus effectus demonstrat Deum esse trinum, quod est potissime veritas theologica, et similia; igitur etc.	151. On the basis of what has been said I give my reply to the first question. And first, speaking of theology in itself as to its necessary truths, I say that the first object of theology in itself cannot be anything but God; which I prove with three reasons. The first is taken from the idea of first object, and I argue thus: the first object contains virtually all the truths of the habit of science of which it is the first object; nothing contains virtually all the theological truths except God; therefore etc. – Proof of the minor: nothing else contains those truths as cause, or as that to which they are attributed, except God, because God is attributed to no other thing; nor does anything contain those truths as an effect does by way of ‘proof that’, for no effect proves that God is triune [cf. n.41], which is the greatest theological truth, or the like truths; therefore etc.
152 Secundo sic: theologia est de his quae soli intellectui divino sunt ƿ naturaliter nota, igitur est de obiecto soliDeo naturaliter noto; sed solus Deus est sibi soli naturaliter notus; igitur etc. - Probatio primae propositionis: si ista scientia est de aliquibus alii intellectui naturaliter notis, igitur praeter illa, aliqua alia sunt cognoscibilia naturaliter soli intellectui divino, quia infinitus est, et ideo plurium cognoscitivus quam intellectus finitus; igitur adhuc erit alia scientia superior quam illa quae est de naturaliter notis intellectui creato. - Probatio minoris: omnis essentia creata alicui intellectui creato potest esse naturaliter nota; igitur sola essentia increata, soli intellectui increato.	152. Secondly thus: theology is of things that are naturally known only to the divine intellect, therefore it is of an object naturally known only to God; but only God is naturally known to himself; therefore etc. – Proof of the first proposition: if this science is about things naturally known to another intellect, then there are, in addition to these things, some other things naturally knowable only to the divine intellect, because the divine intellect is infinite and therefore has cognition of more things than a finite intellect; therefore there will still be another science superior to the one that is about things naturally known to a created intellect. – Proof of the minor: every created essence can be naturally known by some created intellect; therefore only an uncreated essence can be known only by the uncreated intellect.
153 Tertio sic: in nulla scientia traditur ita distincta notitia sive cognitio de aliquo alio quod non est subiectum eius primum sicut traderetur in illa quae esset de illo ut de primo obiecto eius, quia in nulla scientia traditur ita distincta cognitio de non per se subiecto sicut de per se subiecto; tunc enim non esset ratio quare subiectum illud magis esset subiectum eius quam aliud. Igitur si Deus non sit hic subiectum, non traditur hic ita distincta cognitio de eo sicut traderetur in aliqua alia scientia in qua posset esse subiectum; potest autem esse subiectum in alia; ergo illa esset prior ista. ƿ	153. Third thus: in no science is as distinct a cognition or knowledge handed down about any other thing that is not the first object of that science as would be handed down in the science that is about that other thing as about its first object, because in no science is as distinct a cognition handed down about what is not its per se object as about what is its per se object; for then there would be no reason for that subject rather than something else to be its subject. Therefore if God is not here the subject, there is not handed down here as distinct a cognition of him as would be handed down in some other science in which he could be the subject; but he can be the subject in some other science; therefore the latter science would be prior to the former.
154 Praeter istas tres rationes sunt aliae persuasiones. Prima talis: theologia secundum Augustinum De Trinitate XIII cap. 1 et libro XIV cap. 1 pro aliqua parte sui est sapientia, et pro aliqua parte sui est scientia; si autem esset de aliquo non aeterno formaliter, esset formaliter de illo scientia, et nullo modo sapientia, quia aeterna non attribuuntur temporalibus.	154. Besides these three reasons there are other persuasive considerations. The first is as follows: theology according to Augustine On the Trinity13 ch.1 n.2 and 14 ch.1 n.3 is in one part of itself wisdom and in another part of itself science; but if it was formally about anything non-eternal, science would be formally about that thing, and wisdom would not in any way be about it, because eternal things are not attributed to temporal things.
155 Secunda persuasio est quod superior portio rationis aliquam habet perfectionem sibi correspondentem. Ista autem si est de subiecto non aeterno ut de primo subiecto, cum aeternum non attribuatur ad non aeternum, sequitur quod nullo modo est de aeternis, et ita nec perficit superiorem portionem rationis. Ergo esset aliquis habitus intellectualis nobilior isto perficiens illam portionem, quod est inconveniens.	155. The second one is that the superior part of reason has some perfection corresponding to itself. But if this perfection is about a non-eternal subject as about its first object, since the eternal is not attributed to the non-eternal, the result is that in no way is it about eternal things, and thus neither does it perfect the superior part of reason. Therefore there would be some other intellectual habit nobler than it perfecting that part of reason, which is inappropriate.
156 Tertia persuasio est, quia secundum Augustinum XIII De ƿ Trinitate cap. 9 vel XIV De Trinitate cap. 1 ista scientia est de illis quibus fides ((gignitur, defenditur et roboratur)), igitur ista est de eodem obiecto quod est primum obiectum fidei; sed fides est de veritate prima; igitur etc.	156. The third is that, according to Augustine On the Trinity 13 ch.9 n.12 or 14 ch.1 n.3, this science is about things whereby faith is “generated, defended, and strengthened” [cf. n.140], therefore it is about the object which is the same as the first object of faith; but faith is about the first truth; therefore etc.
157 Quarta persuasio est quod ((nobilissima scientia est circa nobilis simum genus)), ex VI Metaphysicae et I De anima; haec autem conceditur nobilissima; igitur oportet quod sit de Deo ut de obiecto.	157. The fourth is that “the most noble science is about the most noble kind of thing,” from Metaphysics 61.1026a21-23 and On the Soul 1.1.402a1-4; but it is conceded that this science is most noble; therefore it ought to be about God as about its object [cf. nn.40, 135].