{"id": "2/11", "url": "https://bradwardine.wrootpress.com/2/11/", "site": "bradwardine", "collection": "book-2", "title": "De causa Dei: Book II, Chapter 11", "title_alt": [], "author": "Thomas Bradwardine", "languages": ["la", "en"], "source_edition": {"title": "Thomae Bradwardini archiepiscopi olim Cantuariensis De causa Dei contra Pelagium, et de virtute causarum, ad suos Mertonenses, libri tres", "editor": "Henry Savile", "place": "London", "year": 1618, "volume": null, "locator": "505B–507B", "scan_url": "https://archive.org/details/decausadeicontra00braduoft"}, "source_text": "CAP. XI. Quod perseuerantia non est aliquod donum Dei creatum a charitate et gratia realiter differens\n\net distinctum.\n\nVT autem istud diuinum adiutorium necessarium libero arbitrio ad perseuerandum in bono, memoratum superius generaliter confuse, cognoscatur distinctius; iam resiat ostendendum, quod perseuerantia non est aliquod donum Dei creatum a charitate et gratia realiter differens, aut distinctum: Si enim esset, non repugnaret illa separari ab inuicem, et aliquem habere charitatem et gratiam, qui perseuerantiam non haberet, et si hoc posset per vnum momentum, posset per aliud, et deinceps vs que ad sinem, sicque aliquis sine perseuerantia finali perseueraret\n\nfinaliter, quod contradictionem includit. Item si sic, habens charitatem sine perseuerantia per momentum, posset in fine illius momenti transire morte naturali, vel alia, sine perseuerantia finali diuinitus sibi data, et sic sine perseuerantia finali posset saluari; contra illud Matth. 10. Qui perseuerauerit vsque in finem, hic saluus erit, hic, scilicet diseretiue, quia hic et non alius, dicente Domino Ezech. 18. Si impius egerit poenitentiam ab omnibus peccatis suis quae operatus est, et custodierit omnia praecepta mea, vita viuet, et non morietur; omnium iniquitatum, quas operatus est, non recordabor, in iustitia sua quam operatus est, viuet; si autem auerterit se iustus a iustitia sua, et fecerit iniquitatem, nunquid viuet? Omnes iustitiae eius non recordabuntur; in praeuaricatione sua qua praeuaricatus est, et in peccaro suo quod peccauit, in ipsis morietur. Et Ecclesiastis 11. Si ceciderit lignum ad Austrum, aut ad Aquilonem, in quocunque loco ceciderit, ibi erit. Nulli etiam dubium, quin quicunque\n\nhabuit donum charitatis et gratiae, et non finaliter perseuerat in eo, cadit ab eo per peccatum mortale, in quo perdurat ad mortem, et est filius mortis aeternae: Talis ergo in charitate et gratia moriens, tamen sine perseuerantia finali simul aeternaliter haereditabit vitam et mortem; Vitam, quia moritur in charitate, quae secundum Augustinum 15. de Trinitate [Dei] 18. sola est quae diuidit inter filios regni aeterni, et filios perditionis aeternae; Mortem, quia sine perseuerantia finali decedit. Item e contrario procedendo, si haec distinguerentur realiter, posset aliquis sine charitate et gratia habere finalem perseuerantiam et saluari, quia qui perseuerauerit vsque in finem hic saluus erit, Matth. 10. quod est contra autoritatem Augustini praemissam. Imo nec posset quisquam esse beatus perfecte sine charitate et dilectione Dei actiua et passiua: Maximum namque bonum maxime sibi deesset; videtur etiam quod si perseuerantia posset esse sine charitate et gratia, posset esse sine quocunque alio tali bono,\n\nsed hoc videtur repugnantiam importare, quod scilicet aliquis perseueret, et non in aliquo tali bono; Perseuerantia namque aliquod tale bonum in quo fundetur, et maneat, necessario praesupponit. Item si haec sic differrent, perseuerantia esset maius bonum, et melius charitate; Esset enim forma ipsam perficiens et consummans, ac ad coronam perducens, sine qua charitas nihil valeret ad vitam, et in cuius virtute omnia bona merita faceret, non e contra, quod non est dandum, quia nullius virtutis actus proprius siue finis est melior actu seu fine proprio charitatis, qui est diligere Deum summe: Mandatum enim de dilectione Dei est maximum et primum mandatum, teste veritate Matth. 22. Apostolus quoque praedicaturus de charitate 1. ad Cor. capit. 13. immediate ante, scilicet cap. 12. vt auditores beneuolos redderet, et attentos, talem propheticum ad commendationem charitatis praemisit, Aemulamini charismata meliora, et adhuc excellentiorem viam vobis demonstro; et statim cap. 13. de ipsa charitate prosequitur in hunc modum; Si linguis hominum loquar, et Angelorum,\n\ncharitatem autem non habeam, factus sum velut aes sonans, etc. qui et in fine capit. sic concludit, Nunc autem manent fides, spes, charitas, tria haec, maior autem horum est charitas; quem et secutus beatus Augustinus 15. de Trin. 18. loquens de charitate, sic ait; Nullum est isto dono Dei excellentius. Item si sic esset, perseuerantia haberet aliquem actum proprium, distinctum ab actibus proprijs aliarum virtutum: Habitus enim per actus proprios, sicut formae per operationes proprias discernuntur, sicut Naturalis et Moralis Philosophi pariter et Theologi contestantur; sed talis actus perseuerantiae proprius assignari non potest: non enim potest poni actus memoriae, intelligentiae, nec etiam voluntatis, vt inductio per singulos manifestat, nec omnino alius dici potest. Item si perseuerantia a charitate differret realiter, cum ipsa sit necessaria ad salutem, Dominus dedisset aliquod speciale mandatum de ipsa; quod tamen nusquam reperitur in testamento veteri, nec in nouo, aut obseruantia mandatorum Domini non esset sufficiens ad salutem; cum tamen quaerenti quid faceret vt\n\nvitam aeternam perciperet, Dominus sic respondit, Mandata nosti, ne adulteres, ne occidas, etc. Marc. 10. ac si diceret manifeste; Haec si facias, vitam aeternam percipies; et Luc. 10. Legis perito, quaerenti a Domino quid faciendo vitam aeternam possideret, requisiuit ab eo, In lege quid scriptum est? quo respondente, Diligis Dominum Deum tuum ex toto corde tuo, etc. et proximum tuum, sicut teipsum, Dominus dixit illi, Hoc fac, et viues: Nec mirum, quoniam in his duobus mandatis tota lex pendet, et prophetae, Matth. 22. Vel arguatur hoc modo, Obseruantia mandatorū sufficit ad salutem, et perseuerantia differt a charitate realiter, ergo non continetur sub mandato de charitate, seu dilectione, nec sub aliquo alio, quia hoc minus videtur, ergo sine perseuerantia potest quis saluari. Vel adhuc sic si libet, Obseruantia mandatorum sufficit ad salutem, et non sine perseuerantia finali, ergo illa continetur sub aliquo praeceptorum, et hoc non erit nisi sub mandato de dilectione et charitate; ergo illa et charitas nequaquam realiter distinguntur: Quare mihi videtur, quod perseuerantia habitualis\n\nsit charitas habitualis, seu perdurans; perseuerantia vero actualis sit peramatio, et ipsum perseuerare finaliter peramare. Vnde et Anselmus de casu Diaboli 3. Perseuerare in faciendo aliquid, vt vno verbo dicatur, est perficere: Nam perseuerare in scribendo aliquid dicimus perscribere, in ducendo, perducere: Dicamus ergo si etiam non sit in vsu, quod perseuerare in voluntate sit peruelle, quare et perseuerare in charitatis amore, de quo dicitur Matth. 10. Qui perseuerauerit vsque in finem, hic saluus erit, est finaliter peramare. Vel aliter potest dici consonantius ipsi voci, et forte propinquius ipsi rei, quod perseuerare est perseruare mandata, et perseuerantia perseruantia mandatorū. Vel adhuc generalius isto modo; Perseuerantia habitualis est iustitia habitualiter perseruata; perseuerantia actualis est iustitiae perseruantia actualis, ipsum vero perseuerare est iustitiam perseruare.\n\nCOROLLARIVM.\n\nCorollarium, Quod nomen perseuerantiae nullam rem absolutam essentialiter significat, sed accidentaliter et relatiue, charitatem videlicet siue iustitiam cum respectu futurae permansionis continue vsque in finem, et quod non improbabiliter posset dici perseuerantiam esse ipsam relationem huius.\n\nVNde manifestum est, quod nomen perseuerantiae nullam rem significat essentialiter aut etiam absolute; sed accidentaliter et relatiue tantummodo, ipsam scilicet charitatem siue\n\niustitiam, cum respectu ad finem, id est cum respectu futurae permansionis continuae vsque in finem, quare et non improbabiliter posset dici, perseuerantiam esse ipsam relationem huiusmodi, quod videtur innuere definitio Aristotelis, et maxime Tullij, cap. 7o. recitata; de quo nolo disserere plus hoc loco: satis enim, vt arbitror, erat de relationibus alibi disputatum. Istud corollarium ex praemissis in isto capitulo satis patet. Potest tamen ex abundanti aliter sic ostendi; Si etenim perseuerantia significaret essentialiter et absolute aliquam rem in viatore, cum illa non sit de essentia viatoris, nec ipsam essentialiter consequens, vt patet in multis ipsa carentibus, posset viator habens finalem perseuerantiam, ipsam amittere; ita quod verum esset, ipsum finalem perseuerantiam amisisse, sicut est de habitibus caeteris, et alijs actionibus absolutis, quod tamen contrdictionem includit: Si enim perseuerantiam finalem amisit, aliquando eam habuit, ergo tunc fuit perseueraturus finaliter, quare et non cafurus, et tunc similiter fuit casurus, sicut euentus subsequens demonstrauit: vel aliter, si iste cecidit in peccatum\n\nmortale, semper prius fuit casurus, ergo nunquant fuit non casurus, ergo nunquam habuit perseuerantiam, ergo nunquam eam amisit, contra hypothesin prius datam. Vnde Augustinus de bono perseuerantiae 7. ita dicit, Dicimus quippe castum, quem nouimus castum, siue sit, siue non sit in eadem castitate mansurus, et siquid aliud diuini muneris habeat, quod teneri et amitti potest, dicimus eum habere quamdiu habet; et si amisit, dicimus habuisse: Perseuerantiam vero vsque in finem, non habet quisquam, nisi perseuerauerit vsque in finem, multi eam possunt habere, nullus amittere, et supra eiusdem primo capit. probat idem.", "english": "CHAPTER XI. That perseverance is not some created gift of God really differing and distinct from charity and grace.\n\nBut so that this divine help, necessary for free choice in order to persevere in the good, which was mentioned above in general and confusedly, may be known more distinctly, it now remains to be shown that perseverance is not some created gift of God really differing or distinct from charity and grace. For if it were, it would not be contradictory for the two to be separated from each other, and for someone to have charity and grace who did not have perseverance. And if this were possible for one moment, it would be possible for another, and so on to the end; and thus someone without final perseverance would persevere finally, which involves a contradiction.\n\nAgain, if it were so, someone who had charity for a moment without perseverance could, at the end of that moment, pass away by natural death or some other, without final perseverance divinely given to him, and so could be saved without final perseverance. This is against Matthew 10: \"He who perseveres to the end, this one will be saved\": this one, that is, singled out, because this one and no other. It is against the Lord's words in Ezekiel 18: \"If the wicked man does penance for all his sins which he has committed, and keeps all my commandments, he will surely live, and not die; I will not remember any of the iniquities he has committed; in his justice which he has done, he will live. But if the just man turns away from his justice and does iniquity, will he live? All his justices will not be remembered; in his transgression by which he has transgressed, and in his sin which he has sinned, in these he will die.\" And Ecclesiastes 11: \"If the tree falls to the south or to the north, in whatever place it falls, there it will be.\" Nor is there any doubt for anyone that whoever has had the gift of charity and grace, and does not persevere in it finally, falls from it by mortal sin, in which he remains until death, and is a son of eternal death.\n\nSuch a man, therefore, dying in charity and grace but without final perseverance, will at once inherit eternally both life and death. He inherits life, because he dies in charity, which according to Augustine, On the Trinity [of God] 15, 18, is the only thing that divides the sons of the eternal kingdom from the sons of eternal perdition.[n1] He inherits death, because he departs without final perseverance.\n\nAgain, proceeding the other way: if these were really distinguished, someone could have final perseverance and be saved without charity and grace, since \"he who perseveres to the end, this one will be saved\" (Matthew 10). This is against the authority of Augustine just set down. Indeed, no one could be perfectly blessed without charity and the love of God, active and passive;[n2] for the greatest good would be most lacking to him. It also seems that if perseverance could exist without charity and grace, it could exist without any other such good,\n\nbut this seems to imply a contradiction, namely that someone should persevere, and not in any such good; for perseverance necessarily presupposes some such good on which it is founded and in which it remains.\n\nAgain, if they differed in this way, perseverance would be a greater good and better than charity. For it would be the form perfecting and consummating charity itself and leading it to the crown, without which charity would be worth nothing for life, and by whose power charity would do all good merits, and not the reverse. This is not to be granted, because no virtue's proper act or end is better than the proper act or end of charity, which is to love God supremely: for the commandment of the love of God is the greatest and first commandment, as Truth bears witness in Matthew 22.\n\nThe Apostle also, when about to preach on charity in 1 Corinthians 13, set before it immediately beforehand, namely in chapter 12, in order to make his hearers well-disposed and attentive, a prophetic saying[n3] of this kind in commendation of charity: \"Strive for the better gifts, and I show you a still more excellent way.\" And at once in chapter 13 he goes on about charity itself in this manner: \"If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels,\n\ncharity, however, I do not have, I have become like sounding brass,\" etc. He also concludes thus at the end of the chapter: \"Now there remain faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.\" Blessed Augustine too followed him, On the Trinity 15, 18, when speaking of charity he says: \"There is no gift of God more excellent than this.\"\n\nAgain, if it were so, perseverance would have some proper act, distinct from the proper acts of the other virtues. For habits are distinguished by their proper acts, as forms are by their proper operations, as natural and moral philosophers and likewise theologians attest. But no such proper act of perseverance can be assigned: an act of memory cannot be posited, nor of intellect, nor even of will, as induction through the individual cases shows, nor can any other be named at all.\n\nAgain, if perseverance differed really from charity, since it is itself necessary for salvation, the Lord would have given some special commandment about it. Yet this is found nowhere, in the Old Testament or the New; otherwise observance of the Lord's commandments would not be sufficient for salvation. And yet when someone asked what he should do to obtain eternal life, the Lord answered thus: \"You know the commandments: do not commit adultery, do not kill,\" etc. (Mark 10), as if to say plainly: \"If you do these things, you will obtain eternal life.\" And in Luke 10, when the expert in the law asked the Lord what he should do to possess eternal life, the Lord asked him: \"What is written in the law?\" He answered: \"You will love the Lord your God with your whole heart,\" etc., \"and your neighbor as yourself\"; and the Lord said to him: \"Do this, and you will live.\" Nor is this surprising, since \"on these two commandments hang the whole law and the prophets\" (Matthew 22).\n\nOr let it be argued in this way: observance of the commandments suffices for salvation, and perseverance differs really from charity; therefore it is not contained under the commandment of charity, or love, nor under any other, since that seems still less so; therefore someone can be saved without perseverance. Or still further, if you like, thus: observance of the commandments suffices for salvation, but not without final perseverance; therefore perseverance is contained under one of the precepts, and this will be only under the commandment of love and charity; therefore perseverance and charity are by no means really distinguished.\n\nHence it seems to me that habitual perseverance is habitual, or enduring, charity; actual perseverance, however, is a loving-through,[n4] and to persevere finally is to love through to the end. Hence Anselm too, On the Fall of the Devil 3: \"To persevere in doing something, to put it in a single word, is to carry it through. For to persevere in writing something we call writing it out; in leading, leading through. Let us say, then, even if it is not in use, that to persevere in will is to will through.\" So also to persevere in the love of charity, of which it is said in Matthew 10, \"He who perseveres to the end, this one will be saved,\" is to love through to the end.\n\nOr it can be said otherwise, more in harmony with the word itself and perhaps closer to the thing itself, that to persevere is to preserve the commandments throughout, and perseverance is the preserving-throughout of the commandments.[n5] Or, still more generally, in this way: habitual perseverance is justice habitually preserved; actual perseverance is the actual preserving of justice; and to persevere itself is to preserve justice.\n\nCOROLLARY.\n\nA corollary: that the name \"perseverance\" signifies no absolute thing essentially, but accidentally and relatively, namely charity or justice with respect to future continuous remaining to the end; and that it could not improbably be said that perseverance is the very relation of this.\n\nHence it is clear that the name \"perseverance\" signifies no thing essentially or even absolutely, but only accidentally and relatively: namely charity itself or justice, with respect to the end, that is, with respect to a future continuous remaining to the end. For this reason it could also not improbably be said that perseverance is the very relation of this kind. The definition of Aristotle seems to hint at this, and above all that of Tullius, recited in chapter 7;[n6] I do not wish to discuss it further in this place, for enough, I think, had been argued elsewhere about relations.\n\nThis corollary is sufficiently clear from what has been set down in this chapter. Yet it can also be shown in another way, over and above that. If perseverance signified essentially and absolutely some thing in the wayfarer, then, since that thing is not of the essence of the wayfarer, nor following from it essentially, as is clear in the many who lack it, a wayfarer who had final perseverance could lose it. So it would be true that he had lost final perseverance, as is the case with other habits and other absolute actions; yet this involves a contradiction. For if he lost final perseverance, he once had it; therefore he was then going to persevere finally, and so was not going to fall; and likewise he was then going to fall, as the subsequent event showed. Or otherwise: if this man fell into\n\nmortal sin, he was always previously going to fall; therefore he was never not going to fall; therefore he never had perseverance; therefore he never lost it, contrary to the hypothesis given earlier.\n\nHence Augustine, On the Good of Perseverance,[n7] 7, says thus: \"We call a man chaste whom we know to be chaste, whether or not he will remain in the same chastity; and if there is anything else of divine gift that he has, which can be held and lost, we say that he has it as long as he has it, and if he has lost it, we say that he had it. But perseverance to the end no one has, unless he has persevered to the end: many can have it, none can lose it.\" And above, in the first chapter of the same, he proves the same.[n8]", "apparatus": {"notes": [{"n": 1, "text": "Savile prints \"de Trinitate [Dei] 18\", with the bracketed Dei as an insertion, perhaps a suggestion of De civitate Dei. The saying is from De Trinitate 15.18.32, and is quoted again just below (506B) with \"On the Trin. 15, 18\". The bracket is kept in the English."}, {"n": 2, "text": "actiua et passiua: charity as loving and as being loved. The \"love of God\" is taken in both senses, objective (our love for God) and subjective (God's love for us), which is why it is both active and passive."}, {"n": 3, "text": "talem propheticum: kept as printed (\"a prophetic saying\"). The context (making hearers benevolos and attentos) is that of a rhetorical prooemium, and propheticum may stand for it, but the print is construable as it stands."}, {"n": 4, "text": "Anselm's per- compounds are rendered by their sense. Perficere is \"carry through\" and perscribere is \"write out\" to the end. Perducere is \"lead through\", and peruelle, which Anselm himself says is not in use, is \"to will through\". Peramare is \"to love through to the end\", and peramatio is \"a loving-through\" (apparently Bradwardine's own noun). The thread of the argument is that per- adds completion through to the end to the root act."}, {"n": 5, "text": "Bradwardine plays on the near-identity in sound of perseuerare and perseruare (\"to keep or preserve throughout\"). English \"persevere / preserve\" imitates it only roughly."}, {"n": 6, "text": "\"Tullius\" is Cicero; the definition is De inventione 2.54.164 (\"perseverantia est in ratione bene considerata stabilis et perpetua permansio\"). \"Chapter 7\" is presumably of this same book. I have not verified the Aristotelian definition he alludes to."}, {"n": 7, "text": "De bono perseverantiae is the older title of Augustine's De dono perseverantiae. I have not verified Savile's chapter number \"7\" against the work."}, {"n": 8, "text": "eiusdem leaves open whether \"the same\" is Augustine's work or Bradwardine's own Book II. The Latin does not say which, and I have kept it open."}], "errata": [{"address": "505C", "keyed": "resiat", "print": "restat"}, {"address": "505C", "keyed": "vs que ad sinem", "print": "vsque ad finem"}, {"address": "505C (margin 505C·1)", "keyed": "remaner", "print": "remanet"}, {"address": "505D", "keyed": "diseretiue", "print": "discretiue"}, {"address": "505D", "keyed": "peccaro", "print": "peccato"}, {"address": "506A (margin 506A·1)", "keyed": "one entry \"Matth. Apostolus.\"", "print": "two separate margin entries: \"Matth.\" (at teste veritate) and \"Apostolus.\" (at Apostolus quoque)"}, {"address": "506C (margin 506C·2)", "keyed": "habebis • uc", "print": "two separate margin entries: variant \"‖ habebis\" (at percipies) and source \"Luc.\" (at \"Luc. 10\")"}, {"address": "507A", "keyed": "cafurus", "print": "casurus"}, {"address": "507B", "keyed": "nunquant", "print": "nunquam"}]}, "segments": [{"anchor": "p505B", "url": "https://bradwardine.wrootpress.com/2/11/#p505B", "locator_display": "505B–505C", "source_text": "CAP. XI. Quod perseuerantia non est aliquod donum Dei creatum a charitate et gratia realiter differens\n\net distinctum.", "english": "CHAPTER XI. That perseverance is not some created gift of God really differing and distinct from charity and grace.", "margins": []}, {"anchor": "p505C", "url": "https://bradwardine.wrootpress.com/2/11/#p505C", "locator_display": "505C–505E", "source_text": "VT autem istud diuinum adiutorium necessarium libero arbitrio ad perseuerandum in bono, memoratum superius generaliter confuse, cognoscatur distinctius; iam resiat ostendendum, quod perseuerantia non est aliquod donum Dei creatum a charitate et gratia realiter differens, aut distinctum: Si enim esset, non repugnaret illa separari ab inuicem, et aliquem habere charitatem et gratiam, qui perseuerantiam non haberet, et si hoc posset per vnum momentum, posset per aliud, et deinceps vs que ad sinem, sicque aliquis sine perseuerantia finali perseueraret\n\nfinaliter, quod contradictionem includit. Item si sic, habens charitatem sine perseuerantia per momentum, posset in fine illius momenti transire morte naturali, vel alia, sine perseuerantia finali diuinitus sibi data, et sic sine perseuerantia finali posset saluari; contra illud Matth. 10. Qui perseuerauerit vsque in finem, hic saluus erit, hic, scilicet diseretiue, quia hic et non alius, dicente Domino Ezech. 18. Si impius egerit poenitentiam ab omnibus peccatis suis quae operatus est, et custodierit omnia praecepta mea, vita viuet, et non morietur; omnium iniquitatum, quas operatus est, non recordabor, in iustitia sua quam operatus est, viuet; si autem auerterit se iustus a iustitia sua, et fecerit iniquitatem, nunquid viuet? Omnes iustitiae eius non recordabuntur; in praeuaricatione sua qua praeuaricatus est, et in peccaro suo quod peccauit, in ipsis morietur. Et Ecclesiastis 11. Si ceciderit lignum ad Austrum, aut ad Aquilonem, in quocunque loco ceciderit, ibi erit. Nulli etiam dubium, quin quicunque\n\nhabuit donum charitatis et gratiae, et non finaliter perseuerat in eo, cadit ab eo per peccatum mortale, in quo perdurat ad mortem, et est filius mortis aeternae: Talis ergo in charitate et gratia moriens, tamen sine perseuerantia finali simul aeternaliter haereditabit vitam et mortem; Vitam, quia moritur in charitate, quae secundum Augustinum 15. de Trinitate [Dei] 18. sola est quae diuidit inter filios regni aeterni, et filios perditionis aeternae; Mortem, quia sine perseuerantia finali decedit. Item e contrario procedendo, si haec distinguerentur realiter, posset aliquis sine charitate et gratia habere finalem perseuerantiam et saluari, quia qui perseuerauerit vsque in finem hic saluus erit, Matth. 10. quod est contra autoritatem Augustini praemissam. Imo nec posset quisquam esse beatus perfecte sine charitate et dilectione Dei actiua et passiua: Maximum namque bonum maxime sibi deesset; videtur etiam quod si perseuerantia posset esse sine charitate et gratia, posset esse sine quocunque alio tali bono,", "english": "But so that this divine help, necessary for free choice in order to persevere in the good, which was mentioned above in general and confusedly, may be known more distinctly, it now remains to be shown that perseverance is not some created gift of God really differing or distinct from charity and grace. For if it were, it would not be contradictory for the two to be separated from each other, and for someone to have charity and grace who did not have perseverance. And if this were possible for one moment, it would be possible for another, and so on to the end; and thus someone without final perseverance would persevere finally, which involves a contradiction.\n\nAgain, if it were so, someone who had charity for a moment without perseverance could, at the end of that moment, pass away by natural death or some other, without final perseverance divinely given to him, and so could be saved without final perseverance. This is against Matthew 10: \"He who perseveres to the end, this one will be saved\": this one, that is, singled out, because this one and no other. It is against the Lord's words in Ezekiel 18: \"If the wicked man does penance for all his sins which he has committed, and keeps all my commandments, he will surely live, and not die; I will not remember any of the iniquities he has committed; in his justice which he has done, he will live. But if the just man turns away from his justice and does iniquity, will he live? All his justices will not be remembered; in his transgression by which he has transgressed, and in his sin which he has sinned, in these he will die.\" And Ecclesiastes 11: \"If the tree falls to the south or to the north, in whatever place it falls, there it will be.\" Nor is there any doubt for anyone that whoever has had the gift of charity and grace, and does not persevere in it finally, falls from it by mortal sin, in which he remains until death, and is a son of eternal death.\n\nSuch a man, therefore, dying in charity and grace but without final perseverance, will at once inherit eternally both life and death. He inherits life, because he dies in charity, which according to Augustine, On the Trinity [of God] 15, 18, is the only thing that divides the sons of the eternal kingdom from the sons of eternal perdition.[n1] He inherits death, because he departs without final perseverance.\n\nAgain, proceeding the other way: if these were really distinguished, someone could have final perseverance and be saved without charity and grace, since \"he who perseveres to the end, this one will be saved\" (Matthew 10). This is against the authority of Augustine just set down. Indeed, no one could be perfectly blessed without charity and the love of God, active and passive;[n2] for the greatest good would be most lacking to him. It also seems that if perseverance could exist without charity and grace, it could exist without any other such good,", "margins": [{"id": "505C·1", "kind": "variant", "text": "(variant) remanet [for restat, \"remains\"]."}, {"id": "505E·1", "kind": "source", "text": "(source) Augustine."}]}, {"anchor": "p506A", "url": "https://bradwardine.wrootpress.com/2/11/#p506A", "locator_display": "506A–506D", "source_text": "sed hoc videtur repugnantiam importare, quod scilicet aliquis perseueret, et non in aliquo tali bono; Perseuerantia namque aliquod tale bonum in quo fundetur, et maneat, necessario praesupponit. Item si haec sic differrent, perseuerantia esset maius bonum, et melius charitate; Esset enim forma ipsam perficiens et consummans, ac ad coronam perducens, sine qua charitas nihil valeret ad vitam, et in cuius virtute omnia bona merita faceret, non e contra, quod non est dandum, quia nullius virtutis actus proprius siue finis est melior actu seu fine proprio charitatis, qui est diligere Deum summe: Mandatum enim de dilectione Dei est maximum et primum mandatum, teste veritate Matth. 22. Apostolus quoque praedicaturus de charitate 1. ad Cor. capit. 13. immediate ante, scilicet cap. 12. vt auditores beneuolos redderet, et attentos, talem propheticum ad commendationem charitatis praemisit, Aemulamini charismata meliora, et adhuc excellentiorem viam vobis demonstro; et statim cap. 13. de ipsa charitate prosequitur in hunc modum; Si linguis hominum loquar, et Angelorum,\n\ncharitatem autem non habeam, factus sum velut aes sonans, etc. qui et in fine capit. sic concludit, Nunc autem manent fides, spes, charitas, tria haec, maior autem horum est charitas; quem et secutus beatus Augustinus 15. de Trin. 18. loquens de charitate, sic ait; Nullum est isto dono Dei excellentius. Item si sic esset, perseuerantia haberet aliquem actum proprium, distinctum ab actibus proprijs aliarum virtutum: Habitus enim per actus proprios, sicut formae per operationes proprias discernuntur, sicut Naturalis et Moralis Philosophi pariter et Theologi contestantur; sed talis actus perseuerantiae proprius assignari non potest: non enim potest poni actus memoriae, intelligentiae, nec etiam voluntatis, vt inductio per singulos manifestat, nec omnino alius dici potest. Item si perseuerantia a charitate differret realiter, cum ipsa sit necessaria ad salutem, Dominus dedisset aliquod speciale mandatum de ipsa; quod tamen nusquam reperitur in testamento veteri, nec in nouo, aut obseruantia mandatorum Domini non esset sufficiens ad salutem; cum tamen quaerenti quid faceret vt\n\nvitam aeternam perciperet, Dominus sic respondit, Mandata nosti, ne adulteres, ne occidas, etc. Marc. 10. ac si diceret manifeste; Haec si facias, vitam aeternam percipies; et Luc. 10. Legis perito, quaerenti a Domino quid faciendo vitam aeternam possideret, requisiuit ab eo, In lege quid scriptum est? quo respondente, Diligis Dominum Deum tuum ex toto corde tuo, etc. et proximum tuum, sicut teipsum, Dominus dixit illi, Hoc fac, et viues: Nec mirum, quoniam in his duobus mandatis tota lex pendet, et prophetae, Matth. 22. Vel arguatur hoc modo, Obseruantia mandatorū sufficit ad salutem, et perseuerantia differt a charitate realiter, ergo non continetur sub mandato de charitate, seu dilectione, nec sub aliquo alio, quia hoc minus videtur, ergo sine perseuerantia potest quis saluari. Vel adhuc sic si libet, Obseruantia mandatorum sufficit ad salutem, et non sine perseuerantia finali, ergo illa continetur sub aliquo praeceptorum, et hoc non erit nisi sub mandato de dilectione et charitate; ergo illa et charitas nequaquam realiter distinguntur: Quare mihi videtur, quod perseuerantia habitualis\n\nsit charitas habitualis, seu perdurans; perseuerantia vero actualis sit peramatio, et ipsum perseuerare finaliter peramare. Vnde et Anselmus de casu Diaboli 3. Perseuerare in faciendo aliquid, vt vno verbo dicatur, est perficere: Nam perseuerare in scribendo aliquid dicimus perscribere, in ducendo, perducere: Dicamus ergo si etiam non sit in vsu, quod perseuerare in voluntate sit peruelle, quare et perseuerare in charitatis amore, de quo dicitur Matth. 10. Qui perseuerauerit vsque in finem, hic saluus erit, est finaliter peramare. Vel aliter potest dici consonantius ipsi voci, et forte propinquius ipsi rei, quod perseuerare est perseruare mandata, et perseuerantia perseruantia mandatorū. Vel adhuc generalius isto modo; Perseuerantia habitualis est iustitia habitualiter perseruata; perseuerantia actualis est iustitiae perseruantia actualis, ipsum vero perseuerare est iustitiam perseruare.", "english": "but this seems to imply a contradiction, namely that someone should persevere, and not in any such good; for perseverance necessarily presupposes some such good on which it is founded and in which it remains.\n\nAgain, if they differed in this way, perseverance would be a greater good and better than charity. For it would be the form perfecting and consummating charity itself and leading it to the crown, without which charity would be worth nothing for life, and by whose power charity would do all good merits, and not the reverse. This is not to be granted, because no virtue's proper act or end is better than the proper act or end of charity, which is to love God supremely: for the commandment of the love of God is the greatest and first commandment, as Truth bears witness in Matthew 22.\n\nThe Apostle also, when about to preach on charity in 1 Corinthians 13, set before it immediately beforehand, namely in chapter 12, in order to make his hearers well-disposed and attentive, a prophetic saying[n3] of this kind in commendation of charity: \"Strive for the better gifts, and I show you a still more excellent way.\" And at once in chapter 13 he goes on about charity itself in this manner: \"If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels,\n\ncharity, however, I do not have, I have become like sounding brass,\" etc. He also concludes thus at the end of the chapter: \"Now there remain faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.\" Blessed Augustine too followed him, On the Trinity 15, 18, when speaking of charity he says: \"There is no gift of God more excellent than this.\"\n\nAgain, if it were so, perseverance would have some proper act, distinct from the proper acts of the other virtues. For habits are distinguished by their proper acts, as forms are by their proper operations, as natural and moral philosophers and likewise theologians attest. But no such proper act of perseverance can be assigned: an act of memory cannot be posited, nor of intellect, nor even of will, as induction through the individual cases shows, nor can any other be named at all.\n\nAgain, if perseverance differed really from charity, since it is itself necessary for salvation, the Lord would have given some special commandment about it. Yet this is found nowhere, in the Old Testament or the New; otherwise observance of the Lord's commandments would not be sufficient for salvation. And yet when someone asked what he should do to obtain eternal life, the Lord answered thus: \"You know the commandments: do not commit adultery, do not kill,\" etc. (Mark 10), as if to say plainly: \"If you do these things, you will obtain eternal life.\" And in Luke 10, when the expert in the law asked the Lord what he should do to possess eternal life, the Lord asked him: \"What is written in the law?\" He answered: \"You will love the Lord your God with your whole heart,\" etc., \"and your neighbor as yourself\"; and the Lord said to him: \"Do this, and you will live.\" Nor is this surprising, since \"on these two commandments hang the whole law and the prophets\" (Matthew 22).\n\nOr let it be argued in this way: observance of the commandments suffices for salvation, and perseverance differs really from charity; therefore it is not contained under the commandment of charity, or love, nor under any other, since that seems still less so; therefore someone can be saved without perseverance. Or still further, if you like, thus: observance of the commandments suffices for salvation, but not without final perseverance; therefore perseverance is contained under one of the precepts, and this will be only under the commandment of love and charity; therefore perseverance and charity are by no means really distinguished.\n\nHence it seems to me that habitual perseverance is habitual, or enduring, charity; actual perseverance, however, is a loving-through,[n4] and to persevere finally is to love through to the end. Hence Anselm too, On the Fall of the Devil 3: \"To persevere in doing something, to put it in a single word, is to carry it through. For to persevere in writing something we call writing it out; in leading, leading through. Let us say, then, even if it is not in use, that to persevere in will is to will through.\" So also to persevere in the love of charity, of which it is said in Matthew 10, \"He who perseveres to the end, this one will be saved,\" is to love through to the end.\n\nOr it can be said otherwise, more in harmony with the word itself and perhaps closer to the thing itself, that to persevere is to preserve the commandments throughout, and perseverance is the preserving-throughout of the commandments.[n5] Or, still more generally, in this way: habitual perseverance is justice habitually preserved; actual perseverance is the actual preserving of justice; and to persevere itself is to preserve justice.", "margins": [{"id": "506A·1", "kind": "source", "text": "(source) Matth. [Matt 22]; Apostolus [the Apostle]."}, {"id": "506B·1", "kind": "source", "text": "(source) Augustine."}, {"id": "506C·1", "kind": "source", "text": "(source) Marc. [Mark 10]."}, {"id": "506C·2", "kind": "variant", "text": "(variant) habebis [\"you will have\", for percipies]; also in the print, a separate source margin: Luc. [Luke 10]."}, {"id": "506C·3", "kind": "source", "text": "(source) Perseverantia habitualis et actualis [habitual and actual perseverance]."}, {"id": "506D·1", "kind": "source", "text": "(source) Anselm."}, {"id": "506D·2", "kind": "source", "text": "(source) Matth. [Matt 10]."}]}, {"anchor": "p506D", "url": "https://bradwardine.wrootpress.com/2/11/#p506D", "locator_display": "506D–507B", "source_text": "COROLLARIVM.\n\nCorollarium, Quod nomen perseuerantiae nullam rem absolutam essentialiter significat, sed accidentaliter et relatiue, charitatem videlicet siue iustitiam cum respectu futurae permansionis continue vsque in finem, et quod non improbabiliter posset dici perseuerantiam esse ipsam relationem huius.\n\nVNde manifestum est, quod nomen perseuerantiae nullam rem significat essentialiter aut etiam absolute; sed accidentaliter et relatiue tantummodo, ipsam scilicet charitatem siue\n\niustitiam, cum respectu ad finem, id est cum respectu futurae permansionis continuae vsque in finem, quare et non improbabiliter posset dici, perseuerantiam esse ipsam relationem huiusmodi, quod videtur innuere definitio Aristotelis, et maxime Tullij, cap. 7o. recitata; de quo nolo disserere plus hoc loco: satis enim, vt arbitror, erat de relationibus alibi disputatum. Istud corollarium ex praemissis in isto capitulo satis patet. Potest tamen ex abundanti aliter sic ostendi; Si etenim perseuerantia significaret essentialiter et absolute aliquam rem in viatore, cum illa non sit de essentia viatoris, nec ipsam essentialiter consequens, vt patet in multis ipsa carentibus, posset viator habens finalem perseuerantiam, ipsam amittere; ita quod verum esset, ipsum finalem perseuerantiam amisisse, sicut est de habitibus caeteris, et alijs actionibus absolutis, quod tamen contrdictionem includit: Si enim perseuerantiam finalem amisit, aliquando eam habuit, ergo tunc fuit perseueraturus finaliter, quare et non cafurus, et tunc similiter fuit casurus, sicut euentus subsequens demonstrauit: vel aliter, si iste cecidit in peccatum\n\nmortale, semper prius fuit casurus, ergo nunquant fuit non casurus, ergo nunquam habuit perseuerantiam, ergo nunquam eam amisit, contra hypothesin prius datam. Vnde Augustinus de bono perseuerantiae 7. ita dicit, Dicimus quippe castum, quem nouimus castum, siue sit, siue non sit in eadem castitate mansurus, et siquid aliud diuini muneris habeat, quod teneri et amitti potest, dicimus eum habere quamdiu habet; et si amisit, dicimus habuisse: Perseuerantiam vero vsque in finem, non habet quisquam, nisi perseuerauerit vsque in finem, multi eam possunt habere, nullus amittere, et supra eiusdem primo capit. probat idem.", "english": "COROLLARY.\n\nA corollary: that the name \"perseverance\" signifies no absolute thing essentially, but accidentally and relatively, namely charity or justice with respect to future continuous remaining to the end; and that it could not improbably be said that perseverance is the very relation of this.\n\nHence it is clear that the name \"perseverance\" signifies no thing essentially or even absolutely, but only accidentally and relatively: namely charity itself or justice, with respect to the end, that is, with respect to a future continuous remaining to the end. For this reason it could also not improbably be said that perseverance is the very relation of this kind. The definition of Aristotle seems to hint at this, and above all that of Tullius, recited in chapter 7;[n6] I do not wish to discuss it further in this place, for enough, I think, had been argued elsewhere about relations.\n\nThis corollary is sufficiently clear from what has been set down in this chapter. Yet it can also be shown in another way, over and above that. If perseverance signified essentially and absolutely some thing in the wayfarer, then, since that thing is not of the essence of the wayfarer, nor following from it essentially, as is clear in the many who lack it, a wayfarer who had final perseverance could lose it. So it would be true that he had lost final perseverance, as is the case with other habits and other absolute actions; yet this involves a contradiction. For if he lost final perseverance, he once had it; therefore he was then going to persevere finally, and so was not going to fall; and likewise he was then going to fall, as the subsequent event showed. Or otherwise: if this man fell into\n\nmortal sin, he was always previously going to fall; therefore he was never not going to fall; therefore he never had perseverance; therefore he never lost it, contrary to the hypothesis given earlier.\n\nHence Augustine, On the Good of Perseverance,[n7] 7, says thus: \"We call a man chaste whom we know to be chaste, whether or not he will remain in the same chastity; and if there is anything else of divine gift that he has, which can be held and lost, we say that he has it as long as he has it, and if he has lost it, we say that he had it. But perseverance to the end no one has, unless he has persevered to the end: many can have it, none can lose it.\" And above, in the first chapter of the same, he proves the same.[n8]", "margins": []}], "provenance": {"method": "Machine translation drafted with Claude (Anthropic) under a set translation convention; the image of each Savile page was supplied to the translator, who logged differences between the keyed Latin and the print as errata. Not yet reviewed by a human scholar.", "corrected_against_scan": true, "verified_on": null, "status": "draft"}, "license_source": "CC0 1.0 (EEBO-TCP A16626); the underlying text is public domain", "license_translation": "CC BY-NC 4.0", "license_apparatus": "CC BY-NC 4.0", "credits": [{"name": "EEBO-TCP (Text Creation Partnership), A16626: the Latin", "license": "CC0 1.0", "url": "https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/eebo/A16626.0001.001"}, {"name": "Internet Archive: the Minerva facsimile page images (linked, not hosted)", "license": null, "url": "https://archive.org/details/decausadeicontra00braduoft"}], "generated": "2026-10-28", "version": "0.1-draft"}